Craig Milo Rogers <rogers@isi.edu> wrote:The point is to rebase to a new system at a point coming up which is convenient. There is an opportunity at 2.6.28, which can be renamed 2.8.0, dropping the constant 2.6. I suppose one counts 2.8.1, 2.8.2 from then on, or does whatever else one wants to do. I don't know - Linus' only objective is to get smaller more meaningful numbers and the details of how one counts afterwards don't matter. Or if one misses the 2.6.28 point, one gets another good opportunity for rebasing at 2.6.30, which could become 3.0.0, dropping the constant 2.6 again. We need smaller numbers now. I.e. We're happy with the system we've got, except for the high numbers we're at, so just rebase. Peter --
| Parag Warudkar | BUG: soft lockup - CPU#1 stuck for 15s! [swapper:0] |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 010/196] Chinese: add translation of Codingstyle |
| Andrew Morton | -mm merge plans for 2.6.23 |
git: | |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 24/37] dccp: Processing Confirm options |
| David Miller | Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Alexey Dobriyan | Re: [GIT]: Networking |
| david | Re: iptables very slow after commit 784544739a25c30637397ace5489eeb6e15d7d49 |
