Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261590AbVC2Wv5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:51:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261596AbVC2Wv5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:51:57 -0500 Received: from ishtar.tlinx.org ([64.81.245.74]:17817 "EHLO ishtar.tlinx.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261590AbVC2Wvs (ORCPT ); Tue, 29 Mar 2005 17:51:48 -0500 Message-ID: <4249DC03.4000806@tlinx.org> Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:51:47 -0800 From: "L. A. Walsh" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Linux-Kernel Subject: RFC: 2.6.release.patchlevel: Patch against 2.6.release[.0] ? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1826 Lines: 37 Given the frequency with which stabilization patches may be released, it may not be practical to expect users to catch each release announcement and download each patch. Especially if small patches are released for stability, as one might (hopefully) expect. Assuming that stability and "fix-it" patches will generally be small (I'd hope). Seeing that the latest "fix-it" patch is already at ".6", I'd have to load multiple patches to catch up from 2.6.11. I blinked my eyes and missed a few or 5 previous stability patches, so I just downloaded the entire bzip...not a biggie, but might create less load on servers if I didn't need to go through 6 patch applications to get current. What do people think? Would it be desirable to have the stability patchsets based against the base release (2.6.11 in this case)? I'll already have downloaded 2.6.11 or the previous base release, but with the frequency of patch releases, it might be more reasonable to have patch revisions all patch against a base release rather than having to download and apply what may grow to be a large number (but small diff) against a base release? Do people think patch-releases will get too big, or might it not be easier to apply them to a constant downloaded copy of the base? It's a bit amusing since I was one of those that complained about the kernel stability, but 2.6.11 has been fairly solid for me, so, of course, I'm 6 patches behind -- I don't think the patch release notifications are getting as wide-spread press (or at least not reaching "/." :-)) as the main releases get. Linda - 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/