FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-18-2010, 07:21 PM
Andreas Radke
 
Default LTS kernel future

Greg KH just posted on the LKML this news:

Here's the state of the -stable kernel trees, as of January 18, 2010.

2.6.27-stable
...
I'll probably keep maintaining it for at least 6-8 more months, but
after that, I can not guarantee it's viability. Note, one other
developer has volunteered to pick up the tree after I am finished with
it, but I can not speak for him at this time.
...
2.6.32-stable

I'd like to announce that the 2.6.32-stable tree is also going to be
maintained as a "long-term" stable release, living for 2-3 years, like
the 2.6.27 kernel is. This is because a number (i.e. more than 2) Linux
distributions are basing their "enterprise" releases on this kernel
version, and it will make their lives easier if I keep it alive.
...



I suggest to move our LTS kernel to .32 series not before our kernel26
has moved to .33 series. Better a bit later than to fast.

-Andy
 
Old 01-18-2010, 08:44 PM
Tobias Powalowski
 
Default LTS kernel future

Am Montag 18 Januar 2010 schrieb Andreas Radke:
> Greg KH just posted on the LKML this news:
>
> Here's the state of the -stable kernel trees, as of January 18, 2010.
>
> 2.6.27-stable
> ...
> I'll probably keep maintaining it for at least 6-8 more months, but
> after that, I can not guarantee it's viability. Note, one other
> developer has volunteered to pick up the tree after I am finished with
> it, but I can not speak for him at this time.
> ...
> 2.6.32-stable
>
> I'd like to announce that the 2.6.32-stable tree is also going to be
> maintained as a "long-term" stable release, living for 2-3 years, like
> the 2.6.27 kernel is. This is because a number (i.e. more than 2) Linux
> distributions are basing their "enterprise" releases on this kernel
> version, and it will make their lives easier if I keep it alive.
> ...
>
>
>
> I suggest to move our LTS kernel to .32 series not before our kernel26
> has moved to .33 series. Better a bit later than to fast.
>
> -Andy
>
I would like to move it sooner than later, early userspace needs more recent
kernel without having hacks and workarounds.

greetings
tpowa
--
Tobias Powalowski
Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa)
http://www.archlinux.org
tpowa@archlinux.org
 
Old 01-18-2010, 09:25 PM
Jan de Groot
 
Default LTS kernel future

On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 22:44 +0100, Tobias Powalowski wrote:
> I would like to move it sooner than later, early userspace needs more
> recent
> kernel without having hacks and workarounds.

There's no point in having an LTS kernel that matches the version of
kernel26, so we should move kernel26 to kernel26-lts just before
updating it to 2.6.33.
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:46 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org