From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261461AbULPU7i (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:59:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262022AbULPU7i (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:59:38 -0500 Received: from clock-tower.bc.nu ([81.2.110.250]:27878 "EHLO localhost.localdomain") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262014AbULPU6g (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2004 15:58:36 -0500 Subject: Re: 2.6 flavours From: Alan Cox To: Jurriaan Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List In-Reply-To: <20041216203740.GA23365@middle.of.nowhere> References: <003901c4e3ab$d86c8580$0e25fe0a@pysiak> <20041216203740.GA23365@middle.of.nowhere> Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <1103226893.21823.31.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.6 (1.4.6-2) Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2004 19:54:54 +0000 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Iau, 2004-12-16 at 20:37, Jurriaan wrote: > I've understood the 2.6.x-ac kernels started with some ide work, then > included some serial fixes, and may or may not have other bug fixes. > >From what I read, they are not as all-including as the 2.4.x-ac kernels > were. Those I recognize most in the 2.6.x-mm kernels. 2.6.x-mm is more like some of the work the old 2.4-ac did in merging new stuff (its also worth noting that 2.4-ac ended up more stable than 2.4 at times so -mm might be stable) The -ac tree is trying to be fairly conservative. When I merge stuff that is a little less conservative because it has to be done then I've tried to put a note in the relnotes for that release warning people its more testing grade. > Whatever you think best, of course. That may be the release where Alan > says 'Here's the new, experimental next-generation SATA code. It'll > probably break every partition you have. Send me bug-reports' :-) That would be Jeff 8)