Subject: Re: [vserver] Stable Linux-VServer Release
From: Corey Wright <undefined@pobox.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 21:36:01 -0500

On Thu, July 28, 2011 10:42 am, Jarry wrote:
> On 28-Jul-11 15:36, Herbert Poetzl wrote:
> 
>> options IMHO are:
>>
>>   - 2.6.32.x (has performance issues, but is long term)
>>   - 2.6.38.x (good performance, not longterm yet)
>>   - 3.0.x    (immature, but the future)
> 
> May I ask why you did not include the latest longterm 2.6.35
> (which I'd personally vote for)?

possibly because 2.6.35 is not as well supported as 2.6.32 and until today i
questioned whether it was still maintained.

i've tracked both 2.6.32 & 2.6.35 for the last three months (because i'm
slowly standardizing from the former to the later due to newer hardware
requirements and only wanting to maintain a single kernel version).

the last 2.6.35 longterm release (2.6.35.13) was three months ago (exactly
from today, the 28th).  during that time 2.6.32 has been updated 4 times
(.40 - .43).  whenever i've heard about a new 2.6.32 release it's
reminded me to check on the status of 2.6.35 (looking in the linux-2.6.35.y &
longterm-queue-2.6.35 git repos on kernel.org) and until today (prompted by
your email) i hadn't seen any signs of life since early May.

it appears andi is working on it again, as of 2 days ago, and i don't mean to
disparage his work, but when greg has been releasing a new 2.6.32.y once or
twice a month without a single 2.6.35.y release for three months, which would
you choose?

corey
--
undefined@pobox.com