* Re: Clean up older Kernels
@ 2003-12-01 20:32 Bradley Chapman
2003-12-01 20:50 ` Jeff Garzik
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bradley Chapman @ 2003-12-01 20:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Garzik; +Cc: linux-kernel
Mr. Garzik,
> > On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 08:40:47PM +0100, Thomas Babut wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > perhaps my question is unusual, but why do you not clean up the older Linux
> > Kernels?
> >
> > The Kernel 2.0.39 is the last stable one, but there is also a 2.0.40-rc6. So
> > why not releasing it as stable 2.0.40 (final)? And Alan Cox isn't active any
> > more for some time and the ac-Patches are very old. They could be removed,
> > or not?
>
> 2.0.x has a maintainer, David Winehall(sp?) IIRC. Poke him... :)
>
> I agree, might as well put out 2.0.40...
I've been wondering about this too, but I was afraid to ask first :-)
When 2.6 is officially released as a stable kernel and 2.4 is relegated to security/
bugfix-only status, what will happen to 2.0 and 2.2? Obviously, they won't be
totally ignored for support reasons (not everyone uses 2.4 - see counter.li.org),
but what will Mr. Anvin do to the frontpage of kernel.org?
Brad
=====
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Clean up older Kernels
2003-12-01 20:32 Clean up older Kernels Bradley Chapman
@ 2003-12-01 20:50 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-12-01 21:20 ` Bradley Chapman
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Garzik @ 2003-12-01 20:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bradley Chapman; +Cc: Jeff Garzik, linux-kernel
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 12:32:46PM -0800, Bradley Chapman wrote:
> Mr. Garzik,
>
> > > On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 08:40:47PM +0100, Thomas Babut wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > perhaps my question is unusual, but why do you not clean up the older Linux
> > > Kernels?
> > >
> > > The Kernel 2.0.39 is the last stable one, but there is also a 2.0.40-rc6. So
> > > why not releasing it as stable 2.0.40 (final)? And Alan Cox isn't active any
> > > more for some time and the ac-Patches are very old. They could be removed,
> > > or not?
> >
> > 2.0.x has a maintainer, David Winehall(sp?) IIRC. Poke him... :)
> >
> > I agree, might as well put out 2.0.40...
>
> I've been wondering about this too, but I was afraid to ask first :-)
>
> When 2.6 is officially released as a stable kernel and 2.4 is relegated to security/
> bugfix-only status, what will happen to 2.0 and 2.2? Obviously, they won't be
> totally ignored for support reasons (not everyone uses 2.4 - see counter.li.org),
> but what will Mr. Anvin do to the frontpage of kernel.org?
I don't see there being any radical change... Alan still puts out 2.2
security fixes occasionally, and the older Linux kernels will _always_
be archived on ftp.kernel.org. They're not going away... :)
Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Clean up older Kernels
2003-12-01 20:50 ` Jeff Garzik
@ 2003-12-01 21:20 ` Bradley Chapman
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Bradley Chapman @ 2003-12-01 21:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff Garzik; +Cc: linux-kernel
Mr. Garzik,
--- Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 12:32:46PM -0800, Bradley Chapman wrote:
> > Mr. Garzik,
> >
> > > > On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 08:40:47PM +0100, Thomas Babut wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > perhaps my question is unusual, but why do you not clean up the older Linux
> > > > Kernels?
> > > >
> > > > The Kernel 2.0.39 is the last stable one, but there is also a 2.0.40-rc6. So
> > > > why not releasing it as stable 2.0.40 (final)? And Alan Cox isn't active any
> > > > more for some time and the ac-Patches are very old. They could be removed,
> > > > or not?
> > >
> > > 2.0.x has a maintainer, David Winehall(sp?) IIRC. Poke him... :)
> > >
> > > I agree, might as well put out 2.0.40...
> >
> > I've been wondering about this too, but I was afraid to ask first :-)
> >
> > When 2.6 is officially released as a stable kernel and 2.4 is relegated to
> security/
> > bugfix-only status, what will happen to 2.0 and 2.2? Obviously, they won't be
> > totally ignored for support reasons (not everyone uses 2.4 - see
> counter.li.org),
> > but what will Mr. Anvin do to the frontpage of kernel.org?
>
> I don't see there being any radical change... Alan still puts out 2.2
> security fixes occasionally, and the older Linux kernels will _always_
> be archived on ftp.kernel.org. They're not going away... :)
And they shouldn't -- there's no reason for them to disappear from the site.
I'm just wondering if Mr. Anvin will reorganize things so that the hierarchy
of kernels is: 2.6, 2.6-pre, 2.6-ac, 2.4, 2.4-pre, 2.2, 2.2-pre, 2.0, 2.0-pre.
Or will he leave things as they are?
Brad
=====
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now
http://companion.yahoo.com/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: Clean up older Kernels
2003-12-01 19:40 Thomas Babut
@ 2003-12-01 19:49 ` Jeff Garzik
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Jeff Garzik @ 2003-12-01 19:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thomas Babut; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 08:40:47PM +0100, Thomas Babut wrote:
> Hi,
>
> perhaps my question is unusual, but why do you not clean up the older Linux
> Kernels?
>
> The Kernel 2.0.39 is the last stable one, but there is also a 2.0.40-rc6. So
> why not releasing it as stable 2.0.40 (final)? And Alan Cox isn't active any
> more for some time and the ac-Patches are very old. They could be removed,
> or not?
2.0.x has a maintainer, David Winehall(sp?) IIRC. Poke him... :)
I agree, might as well put out 2.0.40...
Jeff
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Clean up older Kernels
@ 2003-12-01 19:40 Thomas Babut
2003-12-01 19:49 ` Jeff Garzik
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Babut @ 2003-12-01 19:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Hi,
perhaps my question is unusual, but why do you not clean up the older Linux
Kernels?
The Kernel 2.0.39 is the last stable one, but there is also a 2.0.40-rc6. So
why not releasing it as stable 2.0.40 (final)? And Alan Cox isn't active any
more for some time and the ac-Patches are very old. They could be removed,
or not?
:)
Bye
Thomas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-12-01 21:20 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2003-12-01 20:32 Clean up older Kernels Bradley Chapman
2003-12-01 20:50 ` Jeff Garzik
2003-12-01 21:20 ` Bradley Chapman
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-12-01 19:40 Thomas Babut
2003-12-01 19:49 ` Jeff Garzik
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).