From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754618AbYCLSbh (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:31:37 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753434AbYCLSbZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:31:25 -0400 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.155]:7341 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753135AbYCLSbX (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2008 14:31:23 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Xg5HeUzMB4UhF9bG+oIPclWpCHAxSCGDd+etQ35yKivRbzp3IV+nGefqDEq0+PU8do/TfOUOsSPpVipRbV3cG1UxdjbZa+9/FT130FQb15y5T1IxF6XxDgNlJrM9oUO50qfw48Q5sUM2tBeGDsItvdTnfSCeTf0yB8SFZXRhna0= Message-ID: <47D82173.3010904@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 19:31:15 +0100 From: Xose Vazquez Perez User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080226) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Willy Tarreau CC: m.c.p@kernel.linux-systeme.com, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, webmaster@kernel.org Subject: Re: what's about 2.2 kernel? References: <46B58D50.8090301@gmail.com> <20070805091131.GD6002@1wt.eu> In-Reply-To: <20070805091131.GD6002@1wt.eu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Willy Tarreau wrote: > On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 10:41:52AM +0200, Xose Vazquez Perez wrote: sorry, a bit old... >> time to release a final 2.2.27 and close the >> 2.2 tree ??? >> >> >> The latest 2.2 version : 2.2.26 2004-02-25 00:28 UTC >> The latest prepatch 2.2 : 2.2.27-rc2 2005-01-12 23:55 UTC > > No, I think it would dupe users into thinking that 2.2.27 is up to date, > while it would have missed a lot of security fixes. At least in the > current situation, people tend not to trust it. It's rather sad that it > ended that way, I've been happily putting it everywhere for a long time > when I was telling everyone that 2.4 was an unreliable crap. I hope I > will never set the same fate to 2.4 :-/ > > If you're looking for updates for 2.2, you should take a look at OWL > and PAX patches, both of those tend to include many security fixes, > maybe they're still up to date, but I would doubt about that now. no thanks, 2.2 looks like dead since a long time ago. IMHO 2.2 info *must* be deleted from kernel.org _main_ page. -thanks- regards, -- so much to do, so little time.