| 1 |
I think its more complex than just falling behind - anything later gets |
| 2 |
the spectre fixes etc. and it appears not to be quite stable yet in some |
| 3 |
cases. I am on 4.9.95 for everything except a surface pro4 with 4.16.17 |
| 4 |
(as stable as anything can be on those things) which needs latest. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
BillK |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
On 06/27/18 10:41, Philip Webb wrote: |
| 10 |
> 180626 Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 11 |
>> On Tue, Jun 26, 2018 at 8:58 PM Philip Webb <purslow@××××××××.net> wrote: |
| 12 |
>>> Does anyone know why the latest stable version of Gentoo-sources is 4.9.xx ? |
| 13 |
>>> I installed 4.9.16 , which I continue to use, on 2017-04-06 . |
| 14 |
>>> The tree contains versions of 4.14 4.16 4.17 , but all are still testing. |
| 15 |
>> I tend to just use my own upstream kernels. I'm following the 4.14 longterm |
| 16 |
>> and generally update within a few days of any release. |
| 17 |
>> That said, I have been burned by the odd regression. |
| 18 |
> Thanks for the other info (snipped). All Vanilla-sources are testing, |
| 19 |
> which seems to correspond to your "upstream" kernels. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> What does this say re recent kernel development or Gentoo's kernel team ? |
| 22 |
> -- very quick thanks as always to Gentoo's volunteer developers, |
| 23 |
> but something seems to be going astray here (smile). |
| 24 |
> |
Archives