Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 15:10:34 -0800
From: Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>
To: Nick Warne <nick@linicks.net>
Cc: Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com>,
       Alistair John Strachan <s0348365@sms.ed.ac.uk>,
       "Randy.Dunlap" <rdunlap@xenotime.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       webmaster@kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.14.5 to 2.6.15 patch
Message-ID: <20060104231034.GB14788@kroah.com>
References: <200601041710.37648.nick@linicks.net> <200601042220.59637.nick@linicks.net> <9a8748490601041430g67720b14h10474d9be5059d9@mail.gmail.com> <200601042236.10293.nick@linicks.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <200601042236.10293.nick@linicks.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1071
Lines: 31

On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 10:36:10PM +0000, Nick Warne wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 January 2006 22:30, Jesper Juhl wrote:
> 
> > > (according to kernel.org).  Yet there is no upgrade path for that build
> > > (or any other .x releases)
> > >
> > > It is a bit of a mess really.
> >
> > but, a 2.6.14.6 kernel might come out *after* 2.6.15, then what?
> 
> Nightmares...

It's already happened, we did a 2.6.13.y release after 2.6.14 was out,
and I'm about to do a 2.6.14.y release in a few days too :)

> I get all the points.  Let me say then it needs better distinction on
> what the 'latest kernel' is and on what the 'latest -stable' is.

Ok, exactly how would you like this to be shown?

Again, 2.6.15 is the latest stable kernel right now.  Just because there
isn't a .1 release yet, doesn't mean it isn't.

thanks,

greg k-h
-
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/