Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2014-01-21 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 01/21/2014 07:58 AM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: > On 14-01-21 10:10 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: >> On 08/07/2013 09:07 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: - Shouldn't the EOL status be mentioned in the www.kernel.org front page? >>> >>> It will be marked EOL at kernel.org when it is EOL. Those that

Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2014-01-21 Thread Paul Gortmaker
On 14-01-21 10:10 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > On 08/07/2013 09:07 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >>> >>> - Shouldn't the EOL status be mentioned in the www.kernel.org front page? >> >> It will be marked EOL at kernel.org when it is EOL. Those that care >> about it being EOL would have seen the message

Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2014-01-21 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 08/07/2013 09:07 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: >> >> - Shouldn't the EOL status be mentioned in the www.kernel.org front page? > > It will be marked EOL at kernel.org when it is EOL. Those that care > about it being EOL would have seen the message about it becoming EOL in > the previous 2.6.34.x

Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2014-01-21 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 08/07/2013 09:07 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: - Shouldn't the EOL status be mentioned in the www.kernel.org front page? It will be marked EOL at kernel.org when it is EOL. Those that care about it being EOL would have seen the message about it becoming EOL in the previous 2.6.34.x release

Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2014-01-21 Thread Paul Gortmaker
On 14-01-21 10:10 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: On 08/07/2013 09:07 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: - Shouldn't the EOL status be mentioned in the www.kernel.org front page? It will be marked EOL at kernel.org when it is EOL. Those that care about it being EOL would have seen the message about it

Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2014-01-21 Thread H. Peter Anvin
On 01/21/2014 07:58 AM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: On 14-01-21 10:10 AM, H. Peter Anvin wrote: On 08/07/2013 09:07 PM, Paul Gortmaker wrote: - Shouldn't the EOL status be mentioned in the www.kernel.org front page? It will be marked EOL at kernel.org when it is EOL. Those that care about it

Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2013-08-07 Thread Paul Gortmaker
[2.6.34.x longterm stable status] On 05/08/2013 (Mon 22:32) Aaro Koskinen wrote: > Hi, > > There hasn't been 2.6.34.x stable tree releases for a > while. Also, in some mails you have mentioned EOLing this tree (e.g. > http://marc.info/?l=linux-doc=137393133817894=2). I hav

Re: 2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2013-08-07 Thread Paul Gortmaker
[2.6.34.x longterm stable status] On 05/08/2013 (Mon 22:32) Aaro Koskinen wrote: Hi, There hasn't been 2.6.34.x stable tree releases for a while. Also, in some mails you have mentioned EOLing this tree (e.g. http://marc.info/?l=linux-docm=137393133817894w=2). I have two questions

2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2013-08-05 Thread Aaro Koskinen
Hi, There hasn't been 2.6.34.x stable tree releases for a while. Also, in some mails you have mentioned EOLing this tree (e.g. http://marc.info/?l=linux-doc=137393133817894=2). I have two questions concerning this: - Will there be any more releases, or is it assumed that all users have already

2.6.34.x longterm stable status

2013-08-05 Thread Aaro Koskinen
Hi, There hasn't been 2.6.34.x stable tree releases for a while. Also, in some mails you have mentioned EOLing this tree (e.g. http://marc.info/?l=linux-docm=137393133817894w=2). I have two questions concerning this: - Will there be any more releases, or is it assumed that all users have already