Some development model notes

Some development model notes

Posted Oct 28, 2004 13:11 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722)
In reply to: Some development model notes by zooko
Parent article: Some development model notes

I've been running 2.6 on 2 machines for quite some time (one since 2.6.0, one since ~April), and haven't had any problems with its stability. In fact, the only kernel bug I've encountered was on another machine running 2.4.26, and I identified it as a kernel issue in part by finding that it didn't happen in 2.6.4 (evidentally, it was fixed before 2.6.0, unless the Changelog lines were not informative); I applied a patch from 2.4.27, which seemed to be a backport, to fix it. So it looks to me like 2.4 is essentially just stale at this point, and that 2.6 has more effective debugging.

I do agree that the mainline unmarked releases have not been thoroughly tested upon release. It would be nice if Linus would delegate assigning version numbers to releases to someone else. But using an unmarked release after it has been around for a little while is quite reliable.

---

(Log in to post comments)