Re: Long maintenance kernel versions.

["Américo Wang" <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 07:42:50AM +0200, Geoffrey Said wrote:
>Thanks for the prompt reply,
>
>but this puts us at a disadvantage as we will not know which kernel
>will be long term supported when starting the development process.
>

That is true, unfortunately.


>Take our case for the 34 kernel.  I knew that SuSE were going to use
>the 34 kernel in their 11.3 and since it was the latest we started
>work on the integration.  Now after the work is almost over, we hear
>that it will not be maintained anymore and we need to move to 35.  I
>do not think that this is a good system for people like us which have
>limited resources at their disposal.
>

Why not just pick .32? And backport features from 34 to 32.
That should not be hard.


>Can I suggest that their is a road map and long term maintenance
>kernels are ear marked before hand by the major Linux distributions?
>This will enable us to wait and integrate kernels fully confident that
>they will be long term supported.
>

I think Greg is the right person to answer this question. :)

Thanks!