>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 07:21:53AM -0700, ext Emanoil Kotsev wrote: >> > >> > Dear Felipe, I just want to tell, that while still developing kernels in the 2.6.2X >> series a kernel 2.6.22 can not be labeled as old. Besides it comes along with few >> distros as default kernel. >> > >> > A lot of people like me need some kind of a stable version that we can relay on >>> > for more than playing at home, which is the case with 2.4.X tree. >> > >> > Personally, experiments with 2.6.24 brought me into a big trouble and it took >> > many hours to migrate back to 2.6.20, so please keep in mind that if we say >> > something like this, there is a good reason to do so. >> >> You can always choose any kernel version you want but if you choose such >> an old version (2.6.22 was released in Jul 8th, 2007), please don't rely >> in community support and instead, backport all changes in the particular >> driver you're working with to 2.6.22. >> >> It's always your choice. > > That's plain wrong. 2.6.22 was released in July 2007. But 2.6.22.18 was not. > That came much later - in February this year. And people still do use 2.6.22 > kernels. Besides, the MUSB code hasn't really changed that much in this time. > > Do you really think the problem will go away in 2.6.26? People can't always use the > latest kernel, you know. Embedded kernels don't get enough testing. There's always > a chance this is a new driver. And even if it weren't, the very act of debugging > a problem like this is a good learning experience. I meant new bug. > > Grr. Saying one needs to upgrade to the latest kernel before one can expect > support is a bit like certain proprietary OS vendors - and even they do a better > job than this. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-omap" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
