![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Tue, Apr 09, 2002 at 04:47:47PM -0700, David Lang wrote: > all the -ac kernels need to be treated as -pre > Exactly. > if you watch in detail you can pick ones that are more likly to be stable > then others, but some of them will be intentionally cutting edge. > Alan does have a track record of stable kernels, but his tree does have quite a lot of experimental patches in it. He does warn about patches that could be quite bad though (think ide and the recent suspend patches). In fact, I'm using some -ac kernels in production after it has survived on my workstation for a while and there haven't been any bug reports for the stuff I use... Also, 2.4.18 is the first time that I've seen Alan have -ac patches directly against 2.4.xx instead of 2.4.xx-pre. Unless he says otherwise I wouldn't expect that to happen again. Mike - 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/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:22 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||