| |||||||||||||
On the value of static tracepointsOn the value of static tracepointsPosted Apr 29, 2009 10:01 UTC (Wed) by NAR (subscriber, #1313)In reply to: On the value of static tracepoints by flewellyn Parent article: On the value of static tracepoints
And a 2.6.29.1 stable release would help in what way on a 2.6.16 kernel? Because running the same kernel for two years *is* stability, changing kernels every 6 months is not.
(Log in to post comments)
On the value of static tracepoints Posted Apr 29, 2009 10:21 UTC (Wed) by hppnq (guest, #14462) [Link] Obviously one would get the latest release for the kernel you are running. If that doesn't exist, maybe "stable" has become "obsolete". Arguing that "changing kernels" every six months is necessary is nonsense, even disregarding the fact that it has little or nothing to do with stability in the first place.If it has, you are doing something wrong.
On the value of static tracepoints Posted Apr 29, 2009 10:22 UTC (Wed) by abacus (guest, #49001) [Link]
If you can't live with fast changes, stick to an enterprise distro. These distro's even offer a stable binary kernel API.
On the value of static tracepoints Posted Apr 29, 2009 16:12 UTC (Wed) by nye (guest, #51576) [Link]
2.6.16 *was* maintained for over two years (and is no doubt still maintained by distributions even if the mainline support has been dropped). It's now been replaced by 2.6.27.x as the stable line. There's rather more than 6 months between 16 and 27, but if you really want long-term maintainence then you could always use 2.4.37.1.
On the value of static tracepoints Posted May 6, 2009 21:13 UTC (Wed) by roelofs (guest, #2599) [Link] ... but if you really want long-term maintainence then you could always use 2.4.37.1.Not if you want a working ntpd. Greg
|
|||||||||||||