Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 6 Aug 2011 02:38:44 -0700 (PDT) | From | david@lang ... | Subject | Re: will someone make 2.6.39.* a longterm ? |
| |
On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Greg KH wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 12:05:58PM -0800, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote: >>> Hello All , Is anyone looking at making 2.6.39.* into a longterm >>> stable ? >> >> No, why would they? >> >> Or, to turn it the other way, why do you feel .39 would be a viable >> longer kernel to maintain? What are you using it for that requires it >> to be handled in this manner? >> thanks, >> greg k-h > Probably no reason at all , But ... It is the final 2.6 kernel > version . > > With 3.0 being released there will only be Yours & the others > maintaining the 2.6.<39 otherwise .
but 3.0 has the same changes that would have been in 2.6.40, would you be looking for a long-term release of 2.6.39 if it had been called 2.6.40 instead of 3.0.0? if not, why would you with a different number on the same content?
David Lang
| |