Also, is the release going to somewhat conencide with the libc6ifying of
most distributions?
Does this also mean there will be a new smbmount util? :)
At least, I'll have a chance to try out all the jucy patches that are only
being maintained for the stable kernel (like raid[1,5] and QNX (the 2.1
ver dies with SMP) and others)..
On Thu, 30 Oct 1997, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> > Ok,
> > as people have noticed, 2.0.31 isn't the greatest kernel ever: it works
> > ok most of the time, but a failed try to fix a memory leak actually
> > results in much (MUCH!) worse problems than the leak itself under certain
> > circumstances.
> >
> > I'm not personally too interested in the 2.0.x series (everybody together
> > now: "No, really?"), but I hope we can make a 2.0.32 with the help of the
> > LMP group which contains a fix for the 31 mmap ring problem (and probably
> > also the updated fs/locks.c). I further hope that this will be a question
> > of days rather than weeks (much less months, like 2.0.31).
> >
> > However, at the same time I actually want to start getting 2.2 ready too.
> > I've mentioned this a few times before, that I hoped for a code-freeze
> > before the end of this year so that we could have a 2.2 early next year.
> > Now, I know this is going to take some people by surprise, but the end of
> > this year is actually coming pretty close.
> >
> > So people, I would ask for some stability work be done to get a stable
> > 2.0.32, but as of next week I'd prefer if developers started thinking "Oh,
> > sh*t, Linus thinks he can freeze us, let's panic".
> >
> > Yes, I'm serious. There are lots of things that people want to get done,
> > but we have to start freezing some day, and I _have_ warned people (even
> > if nobody ever seemed to actually notice), so I'm announcing a code-slush,
> > that will eventually turn into a feature-freeze and then a code-freeze.
> >
> > The code-slush means that there are a few outstanding issues: some
> > patches accumulated by David (mainly sound, architecture and networking),
> > and the NFS issues. The kernel NFS server is broken and is outside the
> > code slush - I assume it will get a major overhaul still. The NFS client
> > is being debugged.
> >
> > I just made a 2.1.60 which contains some VFS changes to support
> > pread/pwrite (not too interesting in themselves, althought "Single UNIX"
> > does want them, but the async IO people might be able to use them to good
> > advantage with threads). It also contains the Joliet fs etc. That's going
> > to make some people happy feature-wise.
> >
> > There are still some obvious problems in 2.1 (like ncpfs still doesn't
> > work because it hasn't been updated to the new VFS interface etc), but I'd
> > like for people to really start thinking about "Ok, what can I do to make
> > this _stable_" instead of "Hey, what else do I want?".
> >
> > I'll be away for a few days to be at LISA, but I hope that by the time I
> > get back I'll have a 2.0.32 to bless, and that the worst panic over an
> > eventual 2.2 code-freeze will have settled and people are constructive
> > again. Comments?
> >
> > Linus
> >
> >
> >
>