Linux 2.6.29-rc1

Linus Torvalds
2009-01-11T00:13:18Z

The merge window is over, and while it is quite possible that I missed a
few merge requests in the crazy week that is behind us, apart from those
we should now have most of the bulk of 2.6.29 merged up. And now it's just
a small matter of making sure it's all stable and ready to go.

I wanted to release -rc1 with time enough that by the time I'm on my way
to LCA next weekend, we'd have an -rc2 too, and the worst fallout from
-rc1 would be fixed.

But I know all you nice developers have been oh-so-careful, and there
won't be any fall-out, will there? I'm sure -rc1 is going to be fine.
Chortle.

In pure absolute bulk, almost exactly half of the -rc1 merge was all
just staging drivers, notably a few new wireless drivers that really
aren't ready for real consumption, but that under the new staging rules
are being let in early to hopefully be cleaned up.

Of the remaining 50%, 40% is just regular driver updates: networking (lots
of wireless), usb, DVB, DRM you name it. Pretty standard stuff.

But what perhaps stands out more is that we merged two whole new
filesystems - both btrfs and squashfs got merged. Even if they look pretty
"small" in that relentless onslaught of drivers.

Other than that? Changes everywhere. Arch updates, VM and core kernel
stuff, you name it, it got updated. As usual, even the shortlog is _way_
too big to post here, at about ten thousand lines and half a meg. Just
take my word for it, or download the whole thing.

More productive tends to be looking at a specific area, and just asking
git about it. While the whole thing is pretty daunting, doing something
like

git shortlog --no-merges v2.6.28.. drivers/net/wireless

(pick your particular area of interest yourself, of course) can be
informative.

Anyway, give it a good testing. And please do keep in mind that while new
filesystems can be intruiging and exciting, "new" also means "not widely
tested". I'm sure the btrfs people will appreciate people testing, but I
would suggest that you go very very carefully (squashfs is read-only, so
it's presumably less likely to eat your data, but who knows - the
perversity of the universe is endless).

Linus