Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Tue, 19 Oct 2004 09:23:23 +0200 (CEST) | | From | "T. Weyergraf" <> | | Subject | patch-2.6.9 against 2.6.8.1 |
Hi all,
I just build 2.6.9 using the patch-2.6.9, as always. Previously, I was using 2.6.8.1 and i expected patch-2.6.9 to work on the 2.6.8.1 tree. The patch-2.6.9 is somewhat "confused". Against 2.6.8.1, it fails to change the SUBLEVEL field:
<snip> @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ VERSION = 2 PATCHLEVEL = 6 -SUBLEVEL = 8 +SUBLEVEL = 9 EXTRAVERSION = NAME=Zonked Quokka </snip>
As one can see, the patch failes, since in 2.6.8.1, EXTRAVERSION is set to 1. Also, patch-2.6.9 contains the small fixes in fs/nfs/file.c, that were given in patch-2.6.8.1.
Is this the desired behaviour ? Based on the past, i expected new patches to go against the latest stable kernel ( which is reported 2.6.8.1 by kernel.org ). Will - in the future - new patches skip the 4-digit kernelpatches ?
I do not intent to start a flamewar over whether 4-digit kernelreleases are the right/wrong way to go. I am just looking for a consistent behaviour, which is at this point only given, if you expect new kernelreleases to go against the last 3-digit release.
Is that so ?
Regards, Thomas Weyergraf
-- Thomas Weyergraf kirk@colinet.de Funny IA64 Opcode Dept: ( see arch/ia64/lib/memset.S ) "br.ret.spnt.few" - got back from getting beer, did not spend a lot.
- 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/
|  |