Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 1st Sep 2005 14:47 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 26467
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Incorrect. The odd/even refers to the second number (ie. 6). The 2.1 kernel was the dev branch that lead to the stable 2.2. The 2.3 kernel was the dev branch that lead to the stable 2.4. 2.5 lead to 2.6, and that's where they abandoned the idea. Technically, I expect all 2.6 kernels to be stable, but the kernel devs don't seem to think so. Ted T'so made a particularily disappointing statement once about the hit-and-miss nature of 2.6 releases and their stability. It really puts the non-professional development attitude of the Linux kernel in the spotlight.






Member since:
2005-07-06
bad example there....
you upgraded a stable version 2.6.8 to a testing version 2.6.9
in the linux world, a version number that ends in an even number is stable, and odd numbers are not.
they are for developers to do testing on, so therefore things could be broken.
I am not going to give you abuse about this, as you have probably came from a windows background, and believe everyhting microsoft says about "newest is better" and "the next version will have everything working"
2.6.10 would have been the better choice to upgrade to