Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263793AbUDPUz5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:55:57 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263740AbUDPUxz (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:53:55 -0400 Received: from willy.net1.nerim.net ([62.212.114.60]:6154 "EHLO willy.net1.nerim.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263733AbUDPUxb (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2004 16:53:31 -0400 Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2004 22:50:28 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Andre Hedrick Cc: Marcelo Tosatti , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: SATA support merge in 2.4.27 Message-ID: <20040416205028.GC596@alpha.home.local> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2182 Lines: 45 > Marcelo, > > You are suggesting that 2.6 is not stable ? How could that be ? Andre, ressure me, you were drunk ? A stable kernel is a kernel in which a new release does not induce 20 rejects when applying the same patches as on the previous one, and in which you can confidently upgrade to fix a security issue without worrying that everything else will break under your feet. I'm really happy that 2.4 *WILL* become stable with 2.4.27, and probably will be the first 2.4 kernel ready for far remote deployment. Since about 2.4.23, it has become a lot easier to maintain up-to-date parallel trees in sync with Marcelo's because of less core changes all the time, and I really thank him for this progressive feature freeze. When I'll have a fair insurance that 2.6 does not change so fast, may be I'll start to think about it. But right now, 2.6 only serves me as a boot loader in conjunction with Randy's kexec patch. Sad but true. > Should it not be backported to 2.2 and why not 2.0 ? I thought you were more aware than that about the number of people still using 2.0 and 2.2. They are "a lot". What does "a lot" mean ? Well, I think that there are more people still running production machines on 2.2 and 2.0 than people who have ever used 1.0 or 1.2. And at these times, we considered that "a lot". I know some people who still install RedHat 6.2 from time to time. Why do they do this ? certainly because a standard 2.2.26 kernel + grsecurity offers them enough stability and security to satisfy their needs and not to have to upgrade every 4 months. > Necessary? But their is the new and improved called 2.6. > It is time for the old and lousy to quietly wimper off and die. I would better say that it's time for the old and stable to live long and quitely, and for the young baby to slowly discover the desktop world, then the production world before engaging its reputation on mission-critical systems. Regards, Willy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/