I'm using 2.1.x for workstation (and limited experimental server) use
exlusively since it came out, or thereabouts. Many of the hackers I know do
the same, they just keep quiet until they have a bug report or patch to offer.
> But mostly the people who run production servers or fully featured
> networking stuff use 2.0.X. On the Campus I run I use 2.0.X exclusively.
That's exactly the idea! If you need a _stable_ version, run the stable
one. If you want fun and games, run beta versions; for fireworks look for
experimental patches and pre-releases. There are plenty collections of
these animals, just look around.
> I think it will be very difficult to release 2.2.x and to get a large
> number of users to test it before release. There is not even much concern
> to fix the existing bugs in 2.1.X (See the IP masquerading issue) . Many
> people (like I) have or had to just give up on trying 2.1.X in a fully
> featured environment.
If you percieve so, then help in finding and fixing the bugs and
misfeatures! Just pushing 2.2 out of the door _without_ fixing the bugs,
stabilizing the new features and smoothing the rough corners won't do any
good: It's (more or less) what happened to 2.0, and there is talk of a
2.0.34 now... And there are massive changes in the code for 2.1 that need
to get a workover, and features that were included that need to be made to
work first.
I don't much mind if we go up to 2.1 255 before 2.2.0... if we later don't
go past 2.2.4 ;-)
-- Horst von Brand mailto:vonbrand@pc17.usm.edu.ec - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu