Re: will someone make 2.6.39.* a longterm ?

[david]

On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:

> On Wed, 3 Aug 2011, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 03, 2011 at 12:05:58PM -0800, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
> > > 	Hello All ,  Is anyone looking at making 2.6.39.* into a longterm
> > > stable ?
> >
> > No, why would they?
> >
> > Or, to turn it the other way, why do you feel .39 would be a viable
> > longer kernel to maintain?  What are you using it for that requires it
> > to be handled in this manner?
> > thanks,
> > greg k-h
> 	Probably no reason at all ,  But ...  It is the final 2.6 kernel 
> version .
>
> 	With 3.0 being released there will only be Yours & the others 
> maintaining the 2.6.<39 otherwise .

but 3.0 has the same changes that would have been in 2.6.40, would you be 
looking for a long-term release of 2.6.39 if it had been called 2.6.40 
instead of 3.0.0? if not, why would you with a different number on the 
same content?

David Lang

--
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/