Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 20 Jan 2006 23:55:20 +0000 | From | Russell King <> | Subject | Re: Development tree, PLEASE? |
| |
On Fri, Jan 20, 2006 at 04:33:38PM -0700, Michael Loftis wrote: > As long as it isn't wash rinse repeat, but in development kernels it tends > to be. That's the pain point. It's not one single huge problem, it's the > constant stream of little ones that we try to avoid.
So what you're basically saying is that we should make zero changes to the kernel, because any change (even a minor bug fix) may cause you to need to do some work. Should we just increment the version number every 3 months then?
Maybe we could do this _if_ folk would stop working on the kernel, wanting it to run on their latest creations.
The fact is that in the ARM world, everyone wants a stable kernel which has support for all the features in the SoC de jour that they're using. That previous sentence is self-contradictory - it's an impossible scenario. You can't have a kernel which supports the latest features without progressive and continuous change.
-- Russell King Linux kernel 2.6 ARM Linux - http://www.arm.linux.org.uk/ maintainer of: 2.6 Serial core - 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/
| |