From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261342AbVABXOK (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:14:10 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261343AbVABXOK (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:14:10 -0500 Received: from smtp.terra.es ([213.4.129.129]:52404 "EHLO tsmtp2.mail.isp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261342AbVABXOH convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Sun, 2 Jan 2005 18:14:07 -0500 Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2005 00:14:03 +0100 From: Diego Calleja To: Adrian Bunk Cc: wli@debian.org, aebr@win.tue.nl, solt2@dns.toxicfilms.tv, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: starting with 2.7 Message-Id: <20050103001403.7900df7e.diegocg@teleline.es> In-Reply-To: <20050102221534.GG4183@stusta.de> References: <1697129508.20050102210332@dns.toxicfilms.tv> <20050102203615.GL29332@holomorphy.com> <20050102212427.GG2818@pclin040.win.tue.nl> <20050102214211.GM29332@holomorphy.com> <20050102221534.GG4183@stusta.de> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 1.0.0rc (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org El Sun, 2 Jan 2005 23:15:34 +0100 Adrian Bunk escribió: > The main advantage with stable kernels in the good old days (tm) when 4 > and 6 were even numbers was that you knew if something didn't work, and > upgrading to a new kernel inside this stable kernel series had a > relatively low risk of new breakages. This meant one big migration every > few years and relatively easy upgrades between stable series kernels. That's not always true, 2.4.x development has not been exactly what I'd call "stable". IIRC 2.4.15 - the 2.6 fork I think - could corrupt your filesystems and I don't remember right now if there were more, personally I've suffered of "weird" behaviours until the new VM was stabilized, and I've heard of lots of reiser and ext3 problems until both filesystems got stabilized. I've lost my filesystems 3 times with 2.4, 0 times running 2.5 since 2.5.3x (of course that could be just good luck or bad luck but...) Of course that only proves your point: that changes may cause bugs 8) but for me 2.6 has been by far the stablest release linux has ever had, with some minor issues in each release while at the same time incorporating "big" changes which is something I can accept as "desktop user". Perhaps 2.6 will become "rock stable" or "to be used only by servers not desktops" when 2.7 forks?