Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 16:58:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 16:58:13 -0400 Received: from lightning.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.1]:54543 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 16:57:55 -0400 Subject: Re: Whining about 2.5 (was Re: [PATCH] Re: bug? in using generic read/write functions to read/write block devices in 2.4.11-pre2) To: landley@trommello.org Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 22:02:38 +0100 (BST) Cc: viro@math.psu.edu (Alexander Viro), hch@ns.caldera.de (Christoph Hellwig), linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds) In-Reply-To: <01100315551100.00728@localhost.localdomain> from "Rob Landley" at Oct 03, 2001 03:55:11 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL6] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > question, I know), which VM will it use? I'm guessing Alan will still > inherit the "stable" codebase, but the -ac and -linus trees are breaking new > ground on divergence here. Which tree becomes 2.4 once Alan inherits it? > (Is this part of what's holding up 2.5?) For the moment I plan to maintain the 2.4.*-ac tree. I don't know what will happen about 2.4 longer term - that is a Linus question. Looking at historical VM history I don't think we will eliminate enough "2.4.10+ oops on my box" and "on this load the VM sucks" cases from 2.4.10 to fairly review Andrea's VM until Linus has done another 5 or 6 releases and the VM has been tuned, bugs removed and other oops cases proven not to be vm triggered. Alan - 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/