Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 19 Apr 2008 16:03:20 -0400 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Linux 2.4.36.3 |
| |
Willy Tarreau wrote: > Hi Peter, > > On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 03:22:59PM -0400, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> Any reason to have 2.4.x.y instead of just 2.4.x+y? I find it somewhat >> hard to believe there is substantial new development on 2.4, so it >> really should be all "stable". > > Since 2.4.33 there have been a few minor add-ons and backports (support > for gcc4, e1000 update, and mmap_min_addr come to mind). It's important > for me to indicate when users can blindly upgrade (eg: security fix or > real bug) and when they should at least perform a quick revalidation. > > This has worked well for quite some time now. Since the changes were > really minor here, I did not want to open 2.4.37 with just that. Maybe > there will be no 2.4.37, maybe I'll open it if I gather several significant > driver/arch updates or build fixes (eg: gcc is not supported beyond 4.1 > right now). >
OK, makes sense.
-hpa
| |