Greg KH wrote: > > > See above for why it is not easy at all, and, why even if we do know > > > some fixes are security ones, we would not tag them as such anyway. > > > > I think this supports the argument that the better kernel is always > > the one with the most fixes. > > That's what us kernel developers have been saying for 10+ years, nice to > see it's finally getting some traction :)
It has been obvious for me for a very long time as well, but I am just one person, and my idea doesn't seem to have much traction in Gentoo. :\ > > Rather than separating "bug fixes" from "security fixes" maybe it's > > wiser to think about separating "fixes" from "features" - this may > > be easier, but still not neccessarily easy. > > For stable kernel releases, that type of thing should be quite easy for > someone to do, if they want to do it, as the only type of "features" I > take for them are new device ids. > > But I fail to see how marking 5 patches out of 100 as "features" is > really doing to do much for anyone, do you? For stable kernel releases there would be no need. I think they should be stabilized automatically in Gentoo. It's simply a more accurate model of upstream. //Peter
