From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262515AbVAJUcS (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:32:18 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262508AbVAJUcP (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:32:15 -0500 Received: from clock-tower.bc.nu ([81.2.110.250]:26317 "EHLO localhost.localdomain") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262520AbVAJUaU (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Jan 2005 15:30:20 -0500 Subject: Re: Reviving the concept of a stable series From: Alan Cox To: Adam Sampson Cc: L A Walsh , Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: References: <200501031424.j03EOV2t029019@laptop11.inf.utfsm.cl> <41E07711.3040008@tlinx.org> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1105383229.12028.104.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2) Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:24:02 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Llu, 2005-01-10 at 13:44, Adam Sampson wrote: > L A Walsh writes: > One option would be a "Linux Legacy" project, similar to the Fedora > Legacy project that backports updates to old Red Hat/Fedora Core > releases: a central service that'd collect bug fixes for released > kernels that distributors could then base their kernels on. That way, > we'd get the stability advantages of vendor kernels without needing to > repeat the effort for each distribution. > > Maybe some of the distribution vendors might be interested in setting > up something like this? It would be essentially unmanageable unless you picked only one specific kernel and configuration set to support. Needless to say you won't find vendors even ship the same kernel. Nor for that matter would a few backports magically give you stability.