Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 09:33:26 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 09:33:25 -0400 Received: from ns.suse.de ([213.95.15.193]:27920 "EHLO Cantor.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 4 Jul 2002 09:33:23 -0400 To: Russell King Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [OKS] Kernel release management References: <200207030718.g637I0L145202@pimout2-int.prodigy.net.suse.lists.linux.kernel> <20020704131654.B11601@flint.arm.linux.org.uk.suse.lists.linux.kernel> From: Andi Kleen Date: 04 Jul 2002 15:35:55 +0200 In-Reply-To: Russell King's message of "4 Jul 2002 14:23:19 +0200" Message-ID: X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.6 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1009 Lines: 17 Russell King writes: > If stuff in 2.5 wasn't soo broken (looking at IDE here) then more people > would be using it, and less people would be wanting the 2.5 features back > ported to 2.4. IMHO, at the moment 2.5 has a major problem. It is not > getting the testing it deserves because things like IDE and such like > aren't reasonably stable enough. I have to second RMK's complaint. Testing 2.5 (in this case with x86-64) is a major problem unless you're lucky enough to find a SCSI adapter and a SCSI disk. IDE just deadlocks and hangs too often. This prevents testing everything else and stops development in 2.5 for many things. I don't think the 2.5 release cycle can afford to lose the testers who only have IDE machines. -Andi - 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/