From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933665AbcBBRPw (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2016 12:15:52 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:58182 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S933207AbcBBRPv (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Feb 2016 12:15:51 -0500 Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 09:15:50 -0800 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: Ani Sinha Cc: "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" Subject: Re: Isn't 4.4 long term stable? Message-ID: <20160202171550.GE26366@kroah.com> References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Feb 02, 2016 at 10:09:38PM +0530, Ani Sinha wrote: > Hey guys, > > kernel.org lists linux 4.4.1 as "stable" but the releases page lists > it as a long term stable kernel. Which one is true? Both :) It hasn't had the "chance" to be a longterm stable kernel given that there hasn't been anything to replace it yet :) But you are right, I'll go submit a patch to the releases page to mark it as a longterm kernel so that people don't get confused. thanks, greg k-h