lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Oct]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: 2.0.39 kernel release history
Hi there.

>>> 10 May 1996 9:56:36 752,864 21,395,705 1.3.100
>>>
>>> 12 May 1996 8:03:38 754,351 21,459,958 2.0-pre1
>>> 12 May 1996 20:39:10 754,671 21,471,802 2.0-pre2
>>> 13 May 1996 13:41:53 754,356 21,462,183 2.0-pre3
>>> 14 May 1996 11:41:01 754,475 21,464,772 2.0-pre4
>>> 17 May 1996 13:22:32 757,661 21,556,223 2.0-pre5
>>> 19 May 1996 14:42:05 762,998 21,824,547 2.0-pre6
>>> 21 May 1996 16:06:10 767,778 21,941,963 2.0-pre7
>>> 27 May 1996 13:53:17 774,856 22,132,893 2.0-pre8
>>> 29 May 1996 16:48:03 775,100 22,138,983 2.0-pre9
>>> 1 Jun 1996 17:11:48 775,872 22,162,768 2.0-pre10
>>> 3 Jun 1996 14:20:35 775,338 22,152,832 2.0-pre11
>>> 4 Jun 1996 15:12:15 775,654 22,165,357 2.0-pre12
>>> 6 Jun 1996 14:57:32 777,161 22,213,483 2.0-pre13
>>> 6 Jun 1996 20:23:33 777,132 22,212,656 2.0-pre14
>>>
>>> 9 Jun 1996 10:48:34 777,956 22,256,446 2.0

>> Hm. I seem to remember some 1.99.x kernels...

> Yes, you are right, if I do remember well there as been 10/12 1.99.X
> kernels.

Unless I'm mistaken, the 2.0-pre series of releases was identified
internally as 1.99.x instead. This series of 14 kernels were released
between 12 May 1996 and 6 Jun 1996, and are listed in the quote above.

If I am mistaken and there were indeed a dozen or so kernels released
with 1.99 version numbers between 1.3.100 and 2.0-pre1, they were all
released in the 2 days between those kernels, and I have to state that
I would consider this unlikely, although not impossible.

However, the claim that there were other kernels between 0.01 and 0.10
of which I am not aware, or between 0.12 and 0.95 of which I am also not
aware, would not surprise me in either case. Here is the relevant part
of the history sequence for this period...

>>> 17 Sep 1991 17:29:55 10,239 235,669 0.01
>>>
>>> 3 Dec 1991 1:48:02 13,460 307,481 0.10
>>> 8 Dec 1991 18:37:16 13,839 319,681 0.11
>>> 16 Jan 1992 6:39:10 19,258 446,636 0.12
>>>
>>> 8 Mar 1992 12:04:59 20,882 493,630 0.95
>>> 17 Mar 1992 21:47:55 21,275 503,578 0.95a
>>> 9 Apr 1992 20:48:11 22,147 527,085 0.95c

...and you will note that 11 weeks passed between the 0.01 and 0.10
kernels, and a further 7.5 weeks between the 0.12 and 0.95 kernels.
However, I have been unable to locate any reliable information regarding
the missing kernels, so this is the limit of my knowledge here.

The other period where I suspect missing kernels is this one...

>>> 15 Aug 1993 15:28:14 122,867 3,244,802 0.99.12
>>> 17 Aug 1993 22:39:38 122,871 3,244,979 0.99.12a
>>>
>>> 20 Sep 1993 16:18:01 124,228 3,279,890 0.99.13
>>>
>>> 25 Oct 1993 22:33:27 135,501 3,605,576 0.99.13k
>>>
>>> 29 Nov 1993 9:11:53 157,045 4,180,919 0.99.14
>>> 3 Dec 1993 15:26:49 156,751 4,169,476 0.99.14a

...between the 0.99.12a and 0.99.14 kernel releases. I suspect both that
there were other kernels in each of the three gaps shown above, but have
been unable to find any reliable information regarding them. Personally,
I would anticipate full alphabets for both the 0.99.12 and 0.99.13
subseries as occurs with the 0.99.14 subseries, but can't prove it.

As far as I am aware, the collection of available kernels from 0.99.14
to date is complete, and it is only these five gaps where kernels are
missing. ANY information regarding any of the missing kernels would be
much appreciated, and actual tarballs for ANY of these would be a bonus.

Best wishes from Riley.

-
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 13:08    [W:0.083 / U:2.004 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site