Re: 2.6.14.5 to 2.6.15 patch

[Greg KH]

On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 10:20:59PM +0000, Nick Warne wrote:
> On Wednesday 04 January 2006 22:15, Greg KH wrote:
> 
> > > Then when 2.6.15 came out, that was it!  No patch for the 'latest stable
> > > kernel release 2.6.14.5'.  It was GONE!
> >
> > That's because 2.6.15 is the latest stable release.
> >
> > > OK, I suppose we are all capable of getting back to where we are on
> > > rebuilding to latest 'stable', but there _is_ a missing link for somebody
> > > that doesn't know - and I think backtracking patches isn't really the way
> > > to go if the 'latest stable release' isn't catered for.
> >
> > Um, it is, see my sentance above.  And if you want to download older
> > stable releases, you can jump to the proper directory, how long do you
> > want us to put older stable releases on the main page for?  :)
> 
> OK, I see what you mean, but 2.6.14 wasn't the latest 'release' - 2.6.14.5 was 
> (according to kernel.org).  Yet there is no upgrade path for that build (or 
> any other .x releases)
> 
> It is a bit of a mess really.

Huh?  I'm confused, what exactly would you like the kernel.org site to
look like?

thanks,

greg k-h
-
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/