Re: Linux 2.6.11.1

[James Bourne]

On Fri, 4 Mar 2005, Jeff Garzik wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 04, 2005 at 01:51:13PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> > Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
> > > is this critical?
> > 
> > Doubt it, unless the succeeding patches have a dependency on it.  But the
> > other patches have not been tested without this one being present.
> > 
> > These patches have been in mm for four weeks, so it's probably OK from a
> > stability POV to take them straight into linux-release.  If they were
> > fresher then the way to handle them would be to merge them into Linus's
> > tree and backport in a couple of weeks time.
> 
> Cool, fair enough.  linux-release sounds fine.

ok, 4 bits not just 2...  

Be frugal with the patches and don't take just *anything* that looks like a
good fix.  What you want is a more stable version, meaning less changes as
time goes forward.  I know it's the first couple days, but it looks like it
could easily go the other way...  

Anyway, I hope this helps.

James

> 
> 	Jeff
> 
> 
> 
> -
> 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/
> 
> 

-- 
James Bourne                  | Email:            jbourne@xxxxxxxxxxxx          
UNIX Systems Administration   | WWW:           http://www.hardrock.org
Custom UNIX Programming       | Linux:  The choice of a GNU generation
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 "All you need's an occasional kick in the philosophy." Frank Herbert  
-
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/