[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Kernel Releases
Bill Davidsen wrote:
> On Sun, 25 Nov 2001, David Relson wrote:
> I wish you luck. About 18 months ago I offered to set up a testing group
> to take kernel source before it with up for ftp and to compile it on
> various x86, SPARC{32,64}, and ALPHA machines to be sure it would at least
> compile. I was told with varying degrees of rudeness that it would delay
> the releases (that is a GOOD thing in stable kernels), and that I should
> avoid the 2.4 series and use the "stable" 2.2 kernsls (2.4 IS a stable
> kernel of course, although you would never gues it).

Nobody's against you running a compile-test setup. What they don't like
is the part about not releasing it until you have tested it.
That's because many others want to test too!
This is necessary - some may test aspects other than mere compiling.
Or perhaps a compiler different from yours.

Feel free to serve "known good" kernels - the masses who don't read
or don't want to risk possible new bugs will surely appreciate this.

Just don't limit those of us who want to test the very latest - even
kernels with known bugs. Maybe the bug won't bother me because I
don't use that driver/fs and things like that. I want the kernel even
if, say, minixfs is broken.

Downloading the latest kernel is _not_ for those who can't deal
with occational trouble.
Pre or no pre - development or "stable" series.
Those who run the latest is the testing team. If they don't want to
be, they go for kernels at least a couple of weeks old that haven't
gathered trouble reports.

Helge Hafting
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:13    [W:0.070 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site