Re: 2.6.14.5 to 2.6.15 patch

[Alistair John Strachan <s0348365@sms.ed.ac.uk>]

On Wednesday 04 January 2006 22:01, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 04, 2006 at 08:10:36PM +0000, Alistair John Strachan wrote:
> > On Wednesday 04 January 2006 19:53, Nick Warne wrote:
> > > On Wednesday 04 January 2006 18:34, Alistair John Strachan wrote:
> > > > On Wednesday 04 January 2006 17:39, Nick Warne wrote:
> > > > > On Wednesday 04 January 2006 17:36, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> > > > > > > I went from 2.6.14 -> 2.6.14.2 -> .2-.3 -> .3-.4 -> .4-.5
> > > > > >
> > > > > > and how did you do that?
> > > > > > Noone supplies such incremental patches AFAIK.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, I got from kernel.org - I am _not_ that clever to devise my
> > > > > own incremental patches, otherwise I wouldn't be asking stupid
> > > > > questions...
> > > >
> > > > Nick's right, both are provided automatically by kernel.org.
> > >
> > > Anyway, I started from scratch - 2.6.14, patched to 2.6.15 and then
> > > make oldconfig etc.
> > >
> > > I think there needs to be a way out of this that is easily discernible
> > > - it does get confusing sometimes with all the patches flying around on
> > > a 'stable release'.
> >
> > It's documented in the kernel.
> >
> > There's something in the kernel.org FAQ there about -rc kernels, but it
> > might be better to generalise this for stable releases. Added hpa to CC.
>
> What do you mean, "generalize" this?  Where else could we document it
> better?

Re-read the thread. The confusion here is about "going back" to 2.6.14 before 
patching 2.6.15. This has nothing to do with "rc kernels". We have this 
documented explicitly in the kernel but not on the kernel.org FAQ.

-- 
Cheers,
Alistair.

'No sense being pessimistic, it probably wouldn't work anyway.'
Third year Computer Science undergraduate.
1F2 55 South Clerk Street, Edinburgh, UK.