New versioning scheme ? ( 2.6.8.1 )

New versioning scheme ? ( 2.6.8.1 )

[xerces8]

Hi!

Can someone tell me why the ages old, established versioning scheme of
x.y.z was "abolished" and x.y.z.w was introduced ?

Regards,
David Balazic

Re: New versioning scheme ? ( 2.6.8.1 )

[Gene Heskett]

On Saturday 14 August 2004 22:04, xerces8 wrote:
>Hi!
>
>Can someone tell me why the ages old, established versioning scheme
> of x.y.z was "abolished" and x.y.z.w was introduced ?
>
>Regards,
>David Balazic
>
It wasn't abolished, there was a showstopper problem discovered before 
the ink was dry on the original announcment of 2.6.8.  Thats (the .1) 
the fixed release.

Stuff happens.  To me, thats a very minor concern.  My 11 year old 
Shelty friend and pet took sick and died a horrible death all in 
about 4 hours today while we were unable to locate a vet who was 
available on a Saturday.  So an instant fix .1 release is very minor 
to me.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.24% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com attorneys please note, additions to this message
by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2004 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.

Re: New versioning scheme ? ( 2.6.8.1 )

[Barry K. Nathan]

On Sun, Aug 15, 2004 at 04:04:09AM +0200, xerces8 wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> Can someone tell me why the ages old, established versioning scheme of
> x.y.z was "abolished" and x.y.z.w was introduced ?

Explanation in general:
http://kerneltrap.org/node/view/3522
(you may want to search within that page for "2.6.20.1" to jump to the
meat of the explanation)

Explanation of why 2.6.8.1 and not 2.6.9 in this particular case:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/225784

-Barry K. Nathan <barryn@pobox.com>

Re: New versioning scheme ? ( 2.6.8.1 )

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!

> Can someone tell me why the ages old, established versioning scheme of
> x.y.z was "abolished" and x.y.z.w was introduced ?

No idea, I'd prefer for that kernel to be called 2.6.9. Anyway...

When 2.6.9 comes out, will it be relative to 2.6.8 or to 2.6.8.1?

								Pavel
-- 
People were complaining that M$ turns users into beta-testers...
...jr ghea gurz vagb qrirybcref, naq gurl frrz gb yvxr vg gung jnl!