linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Joe George <joeg@clearcore.com>
To: Michael Loftis <mloftis@wgops.com>
Cc: James Courtier-Dutton <James@superbug.co.uk>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Development tree, PLEASE?
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 09:53:46 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <43D1159A.1070904@clearcore.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6769FDC09295B7E6078A5089@d216-220-25-20.dynip.modwest.com>

Michael Loftis wrote:
> 
> 
> --On January 20, 2006 4:29:44 PM +0000 James Courtier-Dutton 
> <James@superbug.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> It is unclear what you are really ranting about here. The "stable" kernel
>> is stable or at least as stable as it is going to be. It is left to
>> distros to make it even more stable. The interface to user land has not
>> changed.
>> If all you are ranting about is the move from devfs to udevd, then all
>> the user land tools dealing with them have been updated already.
> 
> That's the nail on the head exactly.  Why is this being done in an even 
> numbered kernel?  This represents an API change that has knock on well 
> outside of the kernel, and should be done in development releases.  Why 
> is it LK is the only major project (that I know of) that does this?  
> This is akin to apache changing the format of httpd.conf and saying in 
> say 1.3.38 and saying 'well we made the userland tools too.'
> 
>>
>> What is the real specific problem you are having?
> 
> Well there's a whole grab bag of them that I'll be getting to over the 
> next few months, but the most immediate is the fact that I've gotten new 
> hardware from a venduh that requires me to build a new Debian installer 
> and new debian kernels.  I also have custom packages that depend on 
> devfs being there and now it's not.
> 
> Yes I realise this change isn't out of the blue or anything, but it's in 
> a 'stable' kernel.  Why bother calling 2.6 stable?  We may as well have 
> stayed at 2.5 if this sort of thing is going to continue to be pulled.
> 

I don't think that kernel developers are calling 2.6 a stable kernel
series.  There was an evolution into another development model without
a corresponding change in the kernel numbering.  I think the main
reason the numbering wasn't changed was that it would break thousands
of scripts people are using all over the world.

What would be nice is to go, for example, from 2.6.17 to 3.1, 3.2,
3.3, ...  And have what is currently called the stable series start at
3.1.1.  This would make it clear that the 2.4/2.5 way of doing business
is over.  Someone would have to decide whether it is worth it to break
all the scripts, however.

Joe


  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-01-20 16:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 126+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-01-20 15:17 Development tree, PLEASE? Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 15:31 ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 15:59 ` Marc Koschewski
2006-01-20 16:07   ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 16:34     ` Marc Koschewski
2006-01-20 17:04       ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 16:35     ` Marc Koschewski
2006-01-20 17:06       ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 17:31         ` Diego Calleja
2006-01-20 20:43         ` Kyle Moffett
2006-01-20 16:41     ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-01-20 17:14       ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 19:43         ` Greg KH
2006-01-20 20:56           ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 21:06             ` Christopher Friesen
2006-01-20 23:00             ` Horst von Brand
2006-01-20 23:17             ` Russell King
2006-01-20 23:33               ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 23:55                 ` Russell King
2006-01-21  0:05                   ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-21  0:26                     ` Lars Marowsky-Bree
2006-01-20 23:27             ` Greg KH
2006-01-20 23:52               ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-21  0:03                 ` Russell King
2006-01-21  1:38             ` Alan Cox
2006-01-20 20:25         ` Russell King
2006-01-20 22:05           ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 22:54     ` Horst von Brand
2006-01-20 16:40   ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-01-20 16:48     ` Marc Koschewski
2006-01-20 16:55       ` Dmitry Torokhov
     [not found]         ` <20060120172431.GE5873@stiffy.osknowledge.org>
2006-01-20 17:43           ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-01-20 17:53             ` Marc Koschewski
2006-01-20 18:00               ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-01-20 18:06                 ` Marc Koschewski
2006-02-13 17:17               ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-01-20 16:29 ` James Courtier-Dutton
2006-01-20 16:36   ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 16:50     ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-01-20 17:31       ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 19:03         ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2006-01-20 19:10           ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 23:20             ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-20 23:54               ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 19:21           ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 19:24             ` Valdis.Kletnieks
2006-01-20 20:00             ` Russell King
2006-01-20 21:21               ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 21:40                 ` Doug McNaught
2006-01-20 22:09                   ` Michael Loftis
2006-02-02 12:16                     ` David Weinehall
2006-02-02 18:25                       ` Michael Loftis
2006-02-02 20:10                         ` Dave Jones
2006-02-02 22:05                           ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-02-02 22:10                             ` Dave Jones
2006-02-02 22:19                               ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-02-02 22:31                                 ` Dave Jones
2006-02-02 22:42                                   ` Sam Ravnborg
2006-02-03  1:29                                 ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-03  4:45                                 ` Theodore Ts'o
2006-02-03 12:28                               ` Roman Zippel
2006-02-03 16:04                                 ` Dave Jones
2006-02-02 22:01                         ` Willy Tarreau
2006-02-02 22:31                           ` Christopher Friesen
2006-02-03  5:08                             ` Willy Tarreau
2006-02-02 22:15                         ` David Weinehall
2006-02-02 22:47                           ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 20:10             ` James Courtier-Dutton
2006-01-20 20:20         ` Jesper Juhl
2006-01-20 21:48           ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 22:00             ` Dmitry Torokhov
2006-01-20 22:14               ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-21  9:22             ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-01-21 14:52               ` Alistair John Strachan
2006-01-21 17:03                 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-01-20 21:50           ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-21  9:13         ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-01-20 16:53     ` Joe George [this message]
2006-01-20 17:03       ` Randy.Dunlap
2006-01-20 17:33         ` Joe George
     [not found]     ` <20060120121116.62a8f0a6.seanlkml@sympatico.ca>
2006-01-20 17:11       ` sean
2006-01-20 17:56         ` Development tree, please? Michael Loftis
     [not found]           ` <20060120131120.338ebf17.seanlkml@sympatico.ca>
2006-01-20 18:11             ` sean
2006-01-20 18:43               ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 17:11     ` Development tree, PLEASE? Diego Calleja
2006-01-21  1:56     ` Matthew Frost
2006-01-21  3:19       ` Matthew Frost
2006-01-21  7:22         ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-21  7:38           ` Lee Revell
2006-01-21 21:56             ` Sven-Haegar Koch
2006-01-21 22:18               ` Lee Revell
2006-01-21 22:40                 ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-21 22:47                   ` Lee Revell
2006-01-21 22:51                     ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-22  8:57                       ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-22  9:41                         ` Theodore Ts'o
2006-01-22 16:09                         ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-22 22:59                         ` Daniel Barkalow
2006-01-21 22:49                   ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-21 23:03                   ` Lee Revell
2006-01-22  9:03                     ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-22 17:03                       ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-25 21:30                         ` Nix
2006-01-25 21:36                           ` Lee Revell
2006-01-25 22:12                             ` Nix
2006-01-26  8:44                               ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-26 21:12                                 ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-01-26 21:44                                   ` Bernd Petrovitsch
2006-01-22 17:14                       ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-01-22 17:24                       ` Lee Revell
2006-01-21 11:28           ` Jesper Juhl
2006-01-21 18:09           ` Horst von Brand
2006-01-20 17:08 ` Gábor Lénárt
2006-01-21  0:36   ` Michael Loftis
2006-01-20 19:16 ` Greg KH
2006-01-20 19:27 ` Ben Collins
2006-01-20 22:04   ` Vincent Hanquez
2006-01-21 18:29     ` Johan Kullstam
2006-01-23 13:45       ` Vincent Hanquez
2006-01-24 15:35       ` Bob Copeland
2006-01-21 11:41 ` Ralf Baechle
2006-01-21  6:58 Michael Loftis
2006-03-14 13:57 Chuck Ebbert
2006-03-14 14:09 ` Arjan van de Ven
2006-03-16 20:17   ` Jan Engelhardt
2006-03-16 20:21     ` Jan Engelhardt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=43D1159A.1070904@clearcore.com \
    --to=joeg@clearcore.com \
    --cc=James@superbug.co.uk \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mloftis@wgops.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).