From: "L. A. Walsh" <lkml@tlinx.org>
To: Linux-Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RFC: 2.6.release.patchlevel: Patch against 2.6.release[.0] ?
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2005 14:51:47 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4249DC03.4000806@tlinx.org> (raw)
Given the frequency with which stabilization patches may be released, it
may not be practical to expect users to catch each release announcement
and download each patch.
Especially if small patches are released for stability, as one might
(hopefully) expect. Assuming that stability and "fix-it" patches will
generally be small (I'd hope). Seeing that the latest "fix-it" patch
is already at ".6", I'd have to load multiple patches to catch up from
2.6.11. I blinked my eyes and missed a few or 5 previous stability
patches, so I just downloaded the entire bzip...not a biggie, but
might create less load on servers if I didn't need to go through 6
patch applications to get current.
What do people think? Would it be desirable to have the stability
patchsets based against the base release (2.6.11 in this case)? I'll
already have downloaded 2.6.11 or the previous base release, but
with the frequency of patch releases, it might be more reasonable to
have patch revisions all patch against a base release rather than
having to download and apply what may grow to be a large number (but
small diff) against a base release?
Do people think patch-releases will get too big, or might it not
be easier to apply them to a constant downloaded copy of the base?
It's a bit amusing since I was one of those that complained about the
kernel stability, but 2.6.11 has been fairly solid for me, so, of course,
I'm 6 patches behind -- I don't think the patch release notifications
are getting as wide-spread press (or at least not reaching "/." :-)) as
the main releases get.
Linda
next reply other threads:[~2005-03-29 22:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-03-29 22:51 L. A. Walsh [this message]
2005-03-29 22:58 ` RFC: 2.6.release.patchlevel: Patch against 2.6.release[.0] ? Randy.Dunlap
2005-03-29 23:03 ` Dave Hansen
2005-03-29 23:04 ` Chris Wright
2005-03-31 2:20 ` L. A. Walsh
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4249DC03.4000806@tlinx.org \
--to=lkml@tlinx.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox