From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 25 May 2001 19:08:27 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 25 May 2001 19:08:18 -0400 Received: from router-100M.swansea.linux.org.uk ([194.168.151.17]:34067 "EHLO the-village.bc.nu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 25 May 2001 19:08:06 -0400 Subject: Re: The difference between Linus's kernel and Alan Cox's kernel To: tvinhas@networx.com.br (Thiago Vinhas de Moraes) Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 00:05:39 +0100 (BST) Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, torvalds@transmeta.com (Linus Torvalds), alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox) In-Reply-To: <01052517123904.01385@zeus.networx.com.br> from "Thiago Vinhas de Moraes" at May 25, 2001 05:12:39 PM X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL3] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: From: Alan Cox Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > Why there are two different kernel trees? There is always the official > release, provided by Torvalds, and then Alan provides a patch merging Linus's > stuff, and adding (?) tons of bug fixes. Well it started by accident but it turns out good to have a tree that changes are merged into, tested by those who need the fixes and reviewed by third parties before they go to Linus. So the -ac tree is kind of a peer review, testing and distillation process for patches.