From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262511AbVAEHjV (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 02:39:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262513AbVAEHjV (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 02:39:21 -0500 Received: from canuck.infradead.org ([205.233.218.70]:20229 "EHLO canuck.infradead.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262511AbVAEHjR (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2005 02:39:17 -0500 Subject: Re: starting with 2.7 From: Arjan van de Ven To: Felipe Alfaro Solana Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: References: <1697129508.20050102210332@dns.toxicfilms.tv> <20050102203615.GL29332@holomorphy.com> <20050102212427.GG2818@pclin040.win.tue.nl> <20050103153438.GF2980@stusta.de> <1104767943.4192.17.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> <20050104174712.GI3097@stusta.de> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2005 08:39:11 +0100 Message-Id: <1104910751.4960.5.camel@laptopd505.fenrus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.2 (2.0.2-3) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 4.1 (++++) X-Spam-Report: SpamAssassin version 2.63 on canuck.infradead.org summary: Content analysis details: (4.1 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.3 RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO Received: contains a numeric HELO 1.1 RCVD_IN_DSBL RBL: Received via a relay in list.dsbl.org [] 2.5 RCVD_IN_DYNABLOCK RBL: Sent directly from dynamic IP address [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.1 RCVD_IN_SORBS RBL: SORBS: sender is listed in SORBS [80.57.133.107 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] X-SRS-Rewrite: SMTP reverse-path rewritten from by canuck.infradead.org See http://www.infradead.org/rpr.html Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2002.6.10 or even 2.4.24 to 2.6.10 > > > > anyone who assumes that just becouse the kernel is in the stable > > series they can blindly upgrade their production systems is just > > dreaming. > r > It's not a problem of blindly upgrading, but a problem of knowing that > most of the kernel interfaces do remain stable to reduce the number of > possible problems. kernel interfaces have nothing to do with this. kernel interfaces have zero relationship with stability of the software although I do appreciate that you get in trouble if you need to link (in my opinion) license violating kernel modules into your kernel.