Kernel release status

Posted Dec 19, 2002 19:42 UTC (Thu) by dsime (guest, #5764)
In reply to: Kernel release status by proski
Parent article: Kernel release status

Hmmm,
I think that you have slipped a cog here.
The "stability" of the kernel releases refers to the rate of flux of the kernel NOT the likelihood, of the system it is on, to crash.

The "development" kernel is in constant flux and is considered NOT stable.
The "stable" branch gets bug fixes and some back-porting from development and changes every month or two.
and I believe that the next older branch, currently 2.2, is called "Very Stable" because it only changes once or twice a year.

Kernel release status

Posted Dec 19, 2002 20:50 UTC (Thu) by proski (subscriber, #104) [Link]

So, then the 1.0.9 kernel is even more stable, since it have been the last on the 1.0.x branch for 8 years? Strange, it didn't work with my UMC 486 CPU back then, so I had to run unstable 1.1.x kernels.

Let's not mislead Linux newbies who may be reading LWN. Installing 2.2.x kernel, no matter how new, is probably not the smartest idea if you've got the latest 2-way Xeon with PCI 66/64, Fibre Channel and Firewire.

I believe that at some point the word "stable" changes the meaning and applies to the probability of a software failure after upgrading a system already running an older version of the kernel, as opposed to the probability of a software failure on a new system.

Where that point lies is a big question, but I believe that 2.2.x is already beyond that point.