From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 16:46:40 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 16:46:30 -0400 Received: from ns.cablesurf.de ([195.206.131.193]:51093 "EHLO ns.cablesurf.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 10 Aug 2001 16:46:27 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII From: Oliver Neukum To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2001 22:46:55 +0200 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.2] In-Reply-To: <2167D6D1AACDD31196BE0008C7CF24DDAE0A18@issexc01.solthree.com> In-Reply-To: <2167D6D1AACDD31196BE0008C7CF24DDAE0A18@issexc01.solthree.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-Id: <01081022465500.02522@idun> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Am Freitag, 10. August 2001 21:29 schrieb Phil Kos: > > Just as it makes no sense to run a not-up-to-date release > > kernel, it makes > > no sense to keep anything but the very last on line. Just MVHO. > > I beg to differ, Herr Doktor von Brand. It makes more sense to run a > not-up-to-date release kernel than it does to slavishly update to every new > release without any pressing need for new features or functionality. Don't > fall into the commercial software trap of "it's newer, so it *must* be > better!"--here be tygers... The problem is not what people should be running. The kernels people are actually running are relevant. Any kernel on a CD sold in the last ~3 years is run and bug reports will arrive. If you choose to ignore anything but the latest standard kernels you loose a large number of testers and bugs will go unnoticed longer. Regards Oliver