[lkml]   [2001]   [Nov]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: linux-2.2.20a and gcc 3.0 ?

>>I know how it's done, it's just that in my eyes a stable release is the
>>one where you know there's only 1 .... A 2.95.4 package built on
>>different days (from CVS) will differ. A 2.95.4 package built on
>>different ways from a .tar.gz marked as 'release' will not differ.
>>For instance chasing a kernel bug is difficult when 1 person might use 1
>>version of a compiler and another uses a different version when both
>>says 2.95.4, no matter how miniscule the difference.
> Since patches are being applied to the 2.95 branch at a rate of about
> one a month, I think the date stamp in the version number should be
> quite sufficient to avoid any problems along these lines.

If it's tested and rock stable, why isn't it released?

// Stefan

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 13:12    [W:0.098 / U:1.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site