On Sun, 2 Jan 2005, Adrian Bunk wrote:2.6 is doing better in terms of staying up, not eating my files, etc. I'm less sure about the things being 'changed' (by design) vs. 'broken' (by unintended bug introduction). My sense is that there are people who want to remove features which are not broken nor causing huge overhead or developer effort.
The main advantage with stable kernels in the good old days (tm) when 4
Nowadays in 2.6, every new 2.6 kernel has several regressions compared
to the previous one, and additionally obsolete but used code like
2.2 before 2.2.20 also had this kind of problem, as did
the 2.4 kernel before 2.4.20 or thereabouts.
I'm pretty sure 2.6 is actually doing better than the
early 2.0, 2.2 and 2.4 kernels...