Re: 2.6.14.5 to 2.6.15 patch

[Greg KH <greg@kroah.com>]

On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 02:16:37PM -0800, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2006, Nick Warne wrote:
> 
> > On Wednesday 04 January 2006 22:01, Greg KH wrote:
> >
> > > > > > Nick's right, both are provided automatically by kernel.org.
> > > > >
> > > > > Anyway, I started from scratch - 2.6.14, patched to 2.6.15 and then
> > > > > make oldconfig etc.
> > > > >
> > > > > I think there needs to be a way out of this that is easily discernible
> > > > > - it does get confusing sometimes with all the patches flying around on
> > > > > a 'stable release'.
> > > >
> > > > It's documented in the kernel.
> > > >
> > > > There's something in the kernel.org FAQ there about -rc kernels, but it
> > > > might be better to generalise this for stable releases. Added hpa to CC.
> > >
> > > What do you mean, "generalize" this?  Where else could we document it
> > > better?
> >
> > The issue I hit was we have a 'latest stable kernel release 2.6.14.5' and
> > under it a 'the latest stable kernel' (or words to that effect) on
> > kernel.org.
> >
> > 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!
> 
> Yes, I brought this up a couple of weeks ago, but I was told
> that I was wrong (in some such words).
> I agree that it needs to be fixed.

How would you suggest that it be fixed?

thanks,

greg k-h