linux-kernel - Re: will someone make 2.6.39.* a longterm ?

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1108060233560.32324@asgard.lang.hm>
Date:	Sat, 6 Aug 2011 02:38:44 -0700 (PDT)
From:	david@...g.hm
To:	"Mr. James W. Laferriere" <babydr@...y-dragons.com>
cc:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>,
	Linux Kernel Maillist <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
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

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/