FYI: 2.6 is not a development kernel, per definition. 2.6 is the current "stable" kernel and 2.4 is the "deprecated" (or whatever they call it) kernel. I've had no major issues with 2.6, but not something I would use on a production machine. IIRC, there is no current development kernel? There is no 2.7 right? Any ideas when if they are going to begin work on the next development kernel? Or are they just going to keep tweaking 2.6 until it's really stable? Did they pull a Microsoft on us with 2.6? What's your /opinion?
-----Original Message----- From: Duane Attaway
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Brian Kelsay wrote:
What kernel are you running? Is it a 2.6? I still use 2.4
series and ...
I was running 2.6.9 and am currently using 2.4.28 on my gentoo system while I enjoy my USB mp3 player. I'm going to wait until 2.6 becomes a bit more mature as work is eating up most of my spare time.
On Mon, 10 Jan 2005, Brian Densmore wrote:
FYI: 2.6 is not a development kernel, per definition. 2.6 is the current "stable" kernel and 2.4 is the "deprecated" (or whatever they call it)
Gentoo currently has the gentoo-dev-sources defined as the 2.6.x series, so that appears to be where they are testing all kinds of fun patches.
The 2.4 series seems to be extremely stable, yet much slower and without all the nice extras of 2.6. I'll miss it for now....
-=Duane http://dattaway.org
On Mon, January 10, 2005 11:34 am, Brian Densmore said:
FYI: 2.6 is not a development kernel, per definition. 2.6 is the current "stable" kernel and 2.4 is the "deprecated" (or whatever they call it) kernel. I've had no major issues with 2.6, but not something I would use on a production machine. IIRC, there is no current development kernel? There is no 2.7 right? Any ideas when if they are going to begin work on the next development kernel? Or are they just going to keep tweaking 2.6 until it's really stable? Did they pull a Microsoft on us with 2.6? What's your /opinion?
Here's no 2.7 development tree because Linux hasn't forked it from 2.6 yet. I think the plan is to keep plugging away at 2.6 before jumping to 2.7. My opinion is that it is better to stablize 2.6 before rocking the boat again.
And by defination, 2.6 is 'stable'. I use 2.6 with udev, and it's just too sweet.
Jeremy
On Monday 10 January 2005 11:34 am, Brian Densmore wrote:
FYI: 2.6 is not a development kernel, per definition. 2.6 is the current "stable" kernel and 2.4 is the "deprecated" (or whatever they call it) kernel. I've had no major issues with 2.6, but not something I would use on a production machine. IIRC, there is no current development kernel? There is no 2.7 right? Any ideas when if they are going to begin work on the next development kernel? Or are they just going to keep tweaking 2.6 until it's really stable? Did they pull a Microsoft on us with 2.6? What's your /opinion?
I seem to recall reading on Slashdot or LKML that there are no plans to ever have a development series kernel again -- all development is supposed to be happening at HEAD and it's up to distributions to stabilize on a particular version. And several distributions have done just that; many has selected 2.6.5 or .7 as their stabilization point.
-
Brian Densmore -
Duane Attaway -
Jason Clinton -
Jeremy Turner