Re: Linux 2.4.36.3

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Willy Tarreau wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 03:22:59PM -0400, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Any reason to have 2.4.x.y instead of just 2.4.x+y?  I find it somewhat 
>> hard to believe there is substantial new development on 2.4, so it 
>> really should be all "stable".
> 
> Since 2.4.33 there have been a few minor add-ons and backports (support
> for gcc4, e1000 update, and mmap_min_addr come to mind). It's important
> for me to indicate when users can blindly upgrade (eg: security fix or
> real bug) and when they should at least perform a quick revalidation.
> 
> This has worked well for quite some time now. Since the changes were
> really minor here, I did not want to open 2.4.37 with just that. Maybe
> there will be no 2.4.37, maybe I'll open it if I gather several significant
> driver/arch updates or build fixes (eg: gcc is not supported beyond 4.1
> right now).
> 

OK, makes sense.

	-hpa