Marcos D. Marado Torres wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On Wed, 9 Mar 2005, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: > > >>>which is a patch against the 2.6.11.1 release. If consensus arrives > >>>that this patch should be against the 2.6.11 tree, it will be done that > >>>way in the future. > >> > >>IMHO it sould be against 2.6.11 and not 2.6.11.1, like -rc's that are'nt > >>againt > >>the last -rc but against 2.6.x. > > > >It's a stable release, not a pre/rc, so against 2.6.11.1 sounds most > >logical to > >me. > > Well, yes, _if_ 2.6.12 patch is going to be to aply against 2.6.11.last > instead > of 2.6.11. And, well, either one will cause great panic for hose who aren't > and > the mailing lists and just visit kernel.org to downoad the latest stuff.
<mode="enduser"> IMHO, as long as 2.6.12 patches against 2.6.11, I'm cool with 2.6.11.2 patching against 2.6.11.1, but I think it should patch against 2.6.11 instead </mode> -- Lab tests show that use of micro$oft causes cancer in lab animals - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
