2011/8/23 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx>: > On 08/23/2011 01:28 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 9:24 AM, Genes MailLists<lists@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Dave - any chance you'd put together an F15 2.6.41 based on 3.1? >> I don't think we're going to move F15 to 3.1 until it has some vetting >> on F16/rawhide first. Particularly when it's only in -rc3 at the >> moment. > > Out of curiosity what's preventing us from using 3.x. naming of kernels > on F15? I asked the same question some time ago W dniu 30 czerwca 2011 20:58 użytkownik Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> napisał: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 08:50:17PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > > I ask out of curiosity - why 2.6.40? Is it a big problem to run 3.0 on F15? > > A lot of broken software is assuming version numbers are 2.6.x. We could push a load > of userspace packages to fix it, but that's just the stuff we control. 3rd party add-ons > would break for no good reason. > > This deviates from what upstream calls it, but it's just a number, and not breaking > existing code in an update is more important here. For f16 of course, we'll make > the 3.0 transition, because moving to a new release has differing expectations, > and by the time it ships, hopefully everything that cares will be fixed. > > Or to rephrase it if I install 3.x kernels from koji on an F15 host what > breaks ( or is expected to break )? > > JBG > _______________________________________________ > kernel mailing list > kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel > -- Best regards, Michal http://eventhorizon.pl/ _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel