Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 11 May 2006 13:23:20 +0200 (MEST) | From | Jan Engelhardt <> | Subject | Re: Stability of 2.6.17-rc3? |
| |
>> >Though, Joshua, 2.6.17-rc3 seems to be a rock-solid release. It's safe >> > enough to diff against and boot, if that's what you want to do. >> >> It did not eat the virtual machine so its chances are good. However, I wait >> for 2.6.17 because of the few XFS fixes gone in since then. > >I run a 1TB XFS filesystem on a RAID5 with no ill-effects. I've never >experienced data-loss in 2.6, mostly due to conservative options (no 4k >stacks, no regparm, XFS only). > Oh I must have missed -rc2, in which
Nathan Scott: [XFS] Fix superblock validation regression for the zero imaxpct case. [XFS] Fix a writepage regression where we accidentally stopped honouring [XFS] Fix utime(2) in the case that no times parameter was passed in. [XFS] Fix a problem in aligning inode allocations to stripe unit
got in.
Jan Engelhardt -- - 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/
| |