Are -final releases realy FINAL? (Was Re: kernel 2.4.14 compiling fail for loop device)

Anuradha Ratnaweera (anuradha@gnu.org)
Wed, 7 Nov 2001 09:13:14 +0600

On Mon, Nov 05, 2001 at 11:02:36PM -0500, Robert Love wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2001-11-05 at 22:43, Mike Fedyk wrote:
> >
> > Did anyone have this problem with pre8???
>
> Nope, it was added post-pre8 to final. The deactivate_page function was
> removed completely.

Look, Linus. Things should _not_ happen this way.

Why do we add non-trivial changes when going from last -preX of a test kernel
series to -final?

Please make the last stable -preX the -final _without_ any changes. This is
the third time this caused problem in recent times (2.4.11-dontuse, parport
compile problems and now loop.o), and why don't we learn from previous
mistakes?

Isn't it stupid that some tarballs in the /pub/linux/kernel/v2.4/ do not even
compile, while those in /pub/linux/kernel/testing/ does?

Regards,

Anuradha

-- 


Debian GNU/Linux (kernel 2.4.14-pre7)


I cannot conceive that anybody will require multiplications at the rate
of 40,000 or even 4,000 per hour ...
		-- F. H. Wales (1936)


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/