On Sat, 2003-11-29 at 18:11, Russell King wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2003 at 09:01:04AM -0800, Larry McVoy wrote:
> > The news media hasn't picked up on this yet, they seem to think that
> > 2.6.0 is something that will be useful.  It won't be, there will be a
> > period of months during which things stablize and then you'll see the
> > distros pick up the release.  I don't remember where it was exactly
> > (2.4.18?) but Red Hat waited quite a while before switching to 2.4
> > from 2.2.  This is normal and it works out quite well in practice.
> 
> Red Hat did a 2.4.2 release which was 2.4.2 + a lot of stability changes.

which was basically a 2.4.4-pre 

> IIRC, RH7.2 was based on 2.4.7,

2.4.7 lived for half a day but the VM of 2.4.7 was so bad we had to go
to 2.4.9 immediately..