> what else can we do to help with this?
Two suggestions come to mind...
1. Don't number releases so they look like they correspond to kernel
numbers, which implies a need to match.
2. Give an example such as: "In other words, use the current v3.10 release
whether you are building for kernel 2.6.32 or 3.10"
Sorry, but although English is my first and preferred language, it can still be
deceptively ambiguous.
How 'bout the following text:
Backports is an effort to make sure that drivers that are released
on the newest kernel are also the preferred drivers for use with
older kernels. In other words, you can always use the latest stable
backports release, even on older kernels. The backports drivers
are usable back to kernel 2.6.32.
...or something like that. Whatever the oldest supported kernel is.
Thanks for hitting me up-side the head!
- Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Luis R. Rodriguez
Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 12:44 PM
To: Chris R
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Bug with the website: links are broken
On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 12:39 PM, Chris R <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Its back up...
>
> Thanks very much!
>
>> ...that page has ancient releases, why are you still using them?
>
> I'm stuck at kernel version 2.6.37.
So backports is designed so that you use a backports-3.11 say on 2.6.37. That
is you don't have to use a backport-3.10 only on 3.10 in fact that'd be
pointless. We backport functionality from a kernel as a base and that base is
used as the version name for the release.
A few folks have reported misunderstanding this as well so I'm curious apart
from the documentation we have on the wiki [0] what else can we do to help with
this?
[0] https://backports.wiki.kernel.org
Luis
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe backports" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
