Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263757AbUDQJsy (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Apr 2004 05:48:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263759AbUDQJsy (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Apr 2004 05:48:54 -0400 Received: from astound-64-85-224-245.ca.astound.net ([64.85.224.245]:61709 "EHLO master.linux-ide.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263757AbUDQJsv (ORCPT ); Sat, 17 Apr 2004 05:48:51 -0400 Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 02:46:24 -0700 (PDT) From: Andre Hedrick To: Willy Tarreau cc: Marcelo Tosatti , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: SATA support merge in 2.4.27 In-Reply-To: <20040416205028.GC596@alpha.home.local> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2910 Lines: 68 Willy, I do not drink. I have enough trouble keeping friends when I am sobber. Sheesh, I worked for Merkey before and drinking and posting is a bad idea. Point being, it was not important in the beginning ... so it is not important now. Being consistant is one thing I have always been. Regards, Andre Hedrick LAD Storage Consulting Group On Fri, 16 Apr 2004, Willy Tarreau wrote: > > 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/ > - 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/