Re: Implementing latest stable kernel into Debian stable.
I meant that most normal users use "debian stable (mostly for servers)
and debian testing (mostly for desktops) " Why can't we have always
latest version of linux kernel on for example debian testing and focus
on updating it I belive kernel developers know what they do and for
the most parts the kernel should be actually pretty stable after all.
And yeah most distros fe . Ubuntu follow Debian structure (they are
actually copying it) so if this will happen in debian we will see
newest kernel in most other distros as well .
So I belive it the kernel stable should actually be in atleast debian
testing (NOT IN EXPERIMENTAL) Software developers encourage people to
always use latest stable software of their's I belive this should be
the case here as well...
2013/11/28 Piotr Walaszczyk <pietiatibia1@gmail.com>:
> I meant that most normal users use "debian stable (mostly for servers)
> and debian testing (mostly for desktops) " Why can't we have always
> latest version of linux kernel on for example debian testing and focus
> on updating it I belive kernel developers know what they do and for
> the most parts the kernel should be actually pretty stable after all.
> And yeah most distros fe . Ubuntu follow Debian structure (they are
> actually copying it) so if this will happen in debian we will see
> newest kernel in most other distros as well .
> So I belive it the kernel stable should actually be in atleast debian
> testing (NOT IN EXPERIMENTAL) Software developers encourage people to
> always use latest stable software of their's I belive this should be
> the case here as well...
>
> 2013/11/20 Ian Campbell <ijc@hellion.org.uk>:
>> On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 14:08 +0100, Piotr Walaszczyk wrote:
>>> Which creates a question wouldnt it be better to actually use latest
>>> linux kernel on debian stable
>>
>> Stable in both context means, roughly, "only accepting bug fixes". The
>> idea being that things will only get better and the risk of regressions
>> is low. It also doesn't necessarily mean "bug free" but rather "bugs are
>> known".
>>
>> This is the case when moving between Linux versions, which all have
>> buckets of new and potentially unproven code.
>>
>> If you want to use a newer kernel on stable Debian then you can use the
>> kernels from backports.
>>
>>> (because that's what actually most
>>> "normal" users use)
>>
>> Your premise here is flawed. Most "normal" users use distro kernels
>> which for the most part follow a similar strategy to Debian.
>>
>>> and update it so it doesn't have these regressions
>>> ?
>>
>> We take a reasonably current kernel at the time Debian freezes and
>> follow the stable branch associated with that release.
>>
>> Ian.
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2013/11/19 Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>:
>>> > On Tue, 2013-11-19 at 01:37 +0100, Piotr Walaszczyk wrote:
>>> >> Does it means that stable linux kernel is not actually stable and is
>>> >> full of bugs/crashes??
>>> >
>>> > A 'stable release' means a version that will be supported for some time
>>> > with only relatively small changes (Debian: point releases; Linux:
>>> > stable updates). It has nothing to do with whether the software
>>> > crashes.
>>> >
>>> > A Linux stable release usually does include lots of regressions which
>>> > are mostly fixed by stable updates.
>>> >
>>> > Ben.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Ben Hutchings
>>> > Teamwork is essential - it allows you to blame someone else.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
>> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>> Archive: [🔎] 1384936227.8521.5.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk">http://lists.debian.org/[🔎] 1384936227.8521.5.camel@dagon.hellion.org.uk
>>
Reply to: