the 2.4.xxprex means.. for instance.. 2.4.14pre5 version.. means it is
newer than 2.4.13 but not quite ready to be called 2.4.14 yet.. this is
normal and has been going on for quite a while.. now.. as to 2.4.x being
unstable/expiremental a lot of people would agree that 2.4.x opened too
early and it should have stayed in 2.3.xx for a little while longer.. and
yes.. people think that Linus's change of the VM in 2.4.10 should have
waited for 2.5.x but.. he didn't see it that way..
Jason
On Wed, 31 Oct 2001, Russell Hires wrote:
> This is something I've commented on before, but I thought I'd say it again:
> What's up with the numbering system of Linux? Didn't it used to be
> <major-kernel-version>.odd.xx to show experimental kernels? I don't
> understand how the versioning has changed from 2.0.xx/(2.1.xx) to
> 2.2.xx/(2.3.xx) to 2.4.prexx/(no 2.5.xx) On the surface at least, it seems
> that something has gone awry in kernel development when the "way we keep
> track of things" has changed in this way. It seems that the 2.4.xx kernels
> are still experimental, especially when it comes to this VM thing.
>
> Can anyone help me out on this?
>
> Russell
>
> ____________________________________________________
> "I don't care if you're going nowhere,
> Just take good care of the world."
> -- Depeche Mode
>
>
> >
> > Seriously, I just went to RH7.2, and noticed an incredible difference in
> > speed (as in much S-L-O-W-E-R). It's the 2.4.7 kernel, and I was on
> > 2.2.x before. I do hope Alan quits being contrary about this. It's not
> > the only recent issue where he and Linus have differed significantly,
> > resulting in an effective fork. Of course, this assumes that the 2.4.10
> > VM is as good as it's purported to be.
> >
> > Paul
> >
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 16:05:24 EDT