lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Feb]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [kernel.org users] XZ Migration discussion
    On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 01:25:34PM -0700, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
    > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:03:26AM -0800, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
    > > > 3* Create a new subdirectory for every 2.6.x kernel, and move all the
    > > > related files there. This would shrink the main index drastically, and
    > > > each subdirectory would have a reasonable size (except maybe 2.6.16 and
    > > > 2.6.27.) Oddly enough this has been done for the files under testing/
    > > > already, so I am curious why we don't do it for the release files (and
    > > > the testing/incr/ files, while we're at it.)
    > >
    > > Well, part of the reason why is that we're functionally "stuck" on 2.6;
    > > a prefix which really has lost all meaning.
    > >
    > > It might open up the question if we shouldn't just do a Solaris and drop
    > > the leading 2 (so the next kernel would be 6.33) or call the kernel
    > > after that 3.0 instead of 2.6.34, and then 3.1 instead of 2.6.35.
    >
    > Damn, we forgot to have that fight at Kernel Summit last year.

    No one wanted to take it on :(

    > I'm in favour of the 3.0 / 3.1 / 3.2 with stable@ being responsible for
    > 3.0.1, 3.0.2, 3.1.1, etc.

    I'm in favor of almost _anything_ new, the current numbering scheme
    drives me crazy, but then, I'm the one having to deal with it more than
    anyone these days...

    thanks,

    greg k-h


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2010-02-12 22:57    [W:0.021 / U:181.820 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site