Em Sex 25 Mai 2001 20:05, Alan Cox escreveu:
> > Why there are two different kernel trees? There is always the official
> > release, provided by Torvalds, and then Alan provides a patch merging
> > Linus's stuff, and adding (?) tons of bug fixes.
>
> Well it started by accident but it turns out go
> Why there are two different kernel trees? There is always the official
> release, provided by Torvalds, and then Alan provides a patch merging Linus's
> stuff, and adding (?) tons of bug fixes.
Well it started by accident but it turns out good to have a tree that changes
are merged into, test
On Sat, May 26, 2001 at 07:40:18AM +1000, CaT wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 11:32:18PM +0200, Erik Mouw wrote:
> > I just added this to the kernelnewbies FAQ:
> >
> > http://www.kernelnewbies.org/faq.php3
>
> Typo: First para, last sentence: s/Linux/Linus/
Oops. Fixed, thanks.
Erik
--
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 11:32:18PM +0200, Erik Mouw wrote:
> On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 05:12:39PM -0300, Thiago Vinhas de Moraes wrote:
> > Why there are two different kernel trees? There is always the official
> > release, provided by Torvalds, and then Alan provides a patch merging Linus's
> > s
It really ought to be Linus and/or Alan who answers this, but from my own
observations, here's the way I think it goes:
Alan and Linus don't always agree on what should be in the kernel; and even when
they do, they sometimes disagree on when something is ready to be included.
Alan may think a p
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi.
Maybe lots of you already know the answer, maybe it's a really stupid
question. If it is, please tell me. I'll not be offended.
Why there are two different kernel trees? There is always the official
release, provided by Torvalds, and then Ala
6 matches
Mail list logo
