Re: RFD: Kernel release numbering

[Wakko Warner]

I'm only emailing to the list, feel free to keep my in CC (this way I'll
know what part of the thread was directed towards me)

Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
> __Stable__ would be a good thing. The entire 2.6 development has been a 
> disaster from
> a stability viewpoint. I have to maintain a huge tree of patches in 
> order to ship appliance
> builds due to the lack of stability for 2.6. I think that the even 
> number releases will take longer
> but it's worth the wait.

I agree about the stability of the 2.6 kernels.  The system I'm using now
has always been 2.6 since I first installed it.  I have noticed there were
stability issues with 2.6.  I remember 2.6.7 was fairly good and was a bit
stable.  2.6.8.1 wasn't that stable (I'm sure I had the .1 patch on it,
however, attempting to do a lock over NFS caused the system to hard freeze).
2.6.9 was more unstable especially with USB.  2.6.10 (which I'm using now)
has to be IMO the most stable 2.6 kernel produced.  I'm quite pleased with
it (and to all the kernel hackers, thanks for a great kernel).

P.S.  System is a dual xeon 2.6ghz on a supermicro x5da8 1gb ram.

-- 
 Lab tests show that use of micro$oft causes cancer in lab animals
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/