Re: [gentoo-user] Any consequences to package.mask'ing newer kernels?

[b.n.]

Hemmann, Volker Armin ha scritto:
> On Sonntag, 1. April 2007, b.n. wrote:
>> Hemmann, Volker Armin ha scritto:
>>> In almost every kernel release a security problem is found, that is fixed
>>> in a stable release.
>> Stable release? AFAIK, *all* 2.6.x releases are stable releases.
>
> No, they aren't. There are the 'normal' releases (for example 2.6.20) and
> the 'stable' releases which fix important bugs and security holes (like, for
> example 2.6.20.2).

Yes, I know that. I didn't call them "unstable" and "stable", that's why 
I was confused, however I know.
Now my questions are:
1)I only see gentoo-sources-2.6.X-rY, I never see 
gentoo-sources-2.6.X.a.b-rY .What am I installing when I install 
gentoo-sources-2.6.x-rY?

2)How do the binary distribution people cope with this?

>> The
>> days of double trees (2.4.x and 2.5.x) are gone.
>
> Today we have at least 4 trees.
> Linus.
> Morton.
> The 'stable releases' (2.6.XY.Z)
> Bunk's 2.6.16.XY

Well, there have ALWAYS been a lot of different trees, but Morton, for 
example, AFAIK is not an "official" tree (although it is maintained 
closely to the official).

However that's just nitpicking. :)

>>> Which risk? Which mess? There is not a risk, if you use oldconfig.
>> oldconfig doesn't always work well between major releases (2.6.x vs
>> 2.6.x+1).
>>
> I works like a charm for me....

Not for me. And I've sometimes read of newer kernels breaking things on 
the gentoo mailing list. Upgrading a kernel is never straightforward, 
imho (maybe it's me being unexperienced, however it's my years-old only 
desktop box and I hate to b0rk it).

m.
-- 
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list