From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HY7o1-0000Pq-GW for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 01 Apr 2007 21:41:46 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l31LeWEE026500; Sun, 1 Apr 2007 21:40:32 GMT Received: from poseidon.rz.tu-clausthal.de (poseidon.rz.tu-clausthal.de [139.174.2.21]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l31LZVoh020151 for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2007 21:35:31 GMT Received: from poseidon.rz.tu-clausthal.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id F361420695F for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2007 23:35:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from tu-clausthal.de (poseidon [139.174.2.21]) by poseidon.rz.tu-clausthal.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5FB120695E for ; Sun, 1 Apr 2007 23:35:30 +0200 (CEST) Received: from energy.heim10.tu-clausthal.de (account wevah [139.174.241.94] verified) by tu-clausthal.de (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.7) with ESMTPSA id 21745335 for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 01 Apr 2007 23:35:30 +0200 From: "Hemmann, Volker Armin" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Any consequences to package.mask'ing newer kernels? Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2007 23:35:25 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 References: <20070331055510.GA29960@waltdnes.org> <200704011448.18361.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> <46103776.9010700@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <46103776.9010700@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200704012335.25454.volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> X-Virus-Scanned: by PureMessage V4.7 at tu-clausthal.de X-Archives-Salt: 25d3d70c-c7d1-42ed-80ab-1c0abab52a78 X-Archives-Hash: 64eb7bc093832c90e9975dec526499be On Montag, 2. April 2007, b.n. wrote: > Hemmann, Volker Armin ha scritto: > > On Sonntag, 1. April 2007, b.n. wrote: > >> Hemmann, Volker Armin ha scritto: > >>> In almost every kernel release a security problem is found, that is > >>> fixed in a stable release. > >> > >> Stable release? AFAIK, *all* 2.6.x releases are stable releases. > > > > No, they aren't. There are the 'normal' releases (for example 2.6.20) and > > the 'stable' releases which fix important bugs and security holes (like, > > for example 2.6.20.2). > > Yes, I know that. I didn't call them "unstable" and "stable", that's why > I was confused, however I know. > Now my questions are: > 1)I only see gentoo-sources-2.6.X-rY, I never see > gentoo-sources-2.6.X.a.b-rY .What am I installing when I install > gentoo-sources-2.6.x-rY? look into the changelogs ;) I don't use gentoo-sources, but AFAIK, the -rX releases are related to the vanilla .X releases. > > 2)How do the binary distribution people cope with this? backporting patches. That is why you get kernels named '2.6.17-201' and stuff like that. > > >> The > >> days of double trees (2.4.x and 2.5.x) are gone. > > > > Today we have at least 4 trees. > > Linus. > > Morton. > > The 'stable releases' (2.6.XY.Z) > > Bunk's 2.6.16.XY > > Well, there have ALWAYS been a lot of different trees, but Morton, for > example, AFAIK is not an "official" tree (although it is maintained > closely to the official). It is the official testing tree. Every new feature and lots of patches and drivers have to 'mature' in Morton's tree - and he decides, together with the maintainers, which stuff goes to Linus. -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list