Meaning of major kernel version number

Meaning of major kernel version number

[Erik Hensema]

Hi,

A little question which may be a FAQ: what does the major version number
[1] of the Linux kernel (still) mean? What is the policy on increasing the
major version (eg. on what basis it is decided the next kernel isn't going
to be 2.6 but 3.0)?

I'm asking this question because I think there isn't going to be a
kernel which is as different from the previous one as 2.0 compared to 1.2.
As a little reminder: 2.0 brought us SMP, modules, multi-platform support
(did 1.2 support Alpha? I don't remember), quota support, MD support, loop
device, to name a few.

If this is true, may have to rethink the current versioning scheme, or
we'll stick to 2.x.y forever...

-- 
Erik Hensema (erik@hensema.xs4all.nl)

Re: Meaning of major kernel version number

[Oliver Neukum]

On Tuesday,  1. May 2001 22:49, Erik Hensema wrote:
> Hi,
>
> A little question which may be a FAQ: what does the major version number
> [1] of the Linux kernel (still) mean? What is the policy on increasing the
> major version (eg. on what basis it is decided the next kernel isn't going
> to be 2.6 but 3.0)?

Our great fearless leader will talk with the penguin beyond the sky.

	HTH
		Oliver

Re: Meaning of major kernel version number

[george anzinger]

Oliver Neukum wrote:
> 
> On Tuesday,  1. May 2001 22:49, Erik Hensema wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > A little question which may be a FAQ: what does the major version number
> > [1] of the Linux kernel (still) mean? What is the policy on increasing the
> > major version (eg. on what basis it is decided the next kernel isn't going
> > to be 2.6 but 3.0)?
> 
> Our great fearless leader will talk with the penguin beyond the sky.
> 
>         HTH
>                 Oliver
> -
One definition might be that it changes when user code must be relinked
to work with the next version.

George