On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 11:37:15AM -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > On 3/31/20 4:14 AM, Pierre Labastie via lfs-dev wrote: > > On Tue, 2020-03-31 at 08:52 +0800, Xi Ruoyao via lfs-dev wrote: > > > On 2020-03-30 15:05 -0500, Bruce Dubbs via lfs-dev wrote: > > > > > > For 5.4 LTS, we got 21 releases in this year, and 12 releases since > > > Feb. 1st. > > > No significant improvement. LTS meaning continuing maintenance so > > > we'll still > > > get one release for each severe bug (even if it's a bug in a strange > > > server > > > motherboard). > > > > > > I think we can just hold on kernel 5.x.0 for the development book > > > unless there > > > is a bug making it unusable. (There is already a note telling the > > > audience to > > > use latest 5.x.y.) And, we should update to latest 5.x.y before 9.2. > > > > > > > I'd say that what we have (update the kernel to latest when updating > > other parts of the book) is not so bad, except we should refrain to > > update to whatever.0 versions. It's not because the maintainers have > > done some mistake once (modifying a driver between the last rc and the > > release IIUC), that they always will do, but we should consider > > whatever.0 versions are still "development" (not only for kernel > > actually). > > > > With this policy, chances are that the first version we include in a > > 5.x series is higher than 5.x.1. > > > > Anyway, since LTS gets updated very often too, there is no much gain in > > using LTS. > > OK. I guess we can go with that. > > -- Bruce >
Meanwhile, looking at the commits for 5.6.1-rc1, I don't know if the fix for intel wifi has even gone upstream yet, but none of the items for .1 look relevant to that, so perhaps hold off for .2 for those people who use intel wifi. ĸen -- OMG!!! Ponies!!! -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
