On Sunday 21 Aug 2016 07:28:17 Rich Freeman wrote: > ... there is nothing wrong with having some internal QA on kernel > releases. 4.1 had a nasty memory leak a release or two ago that was > killing my system after only an hour or two uptime. They took over a > week to stabilize the fix as well (though a patch was out fairly quickly). > So, I'm not in nearly the rush to update kernels as I used to be
I've formed the impression that a good many kernel updates are mainly just to incorporate code for new devices, so I don't rush into it normally either. However, this box does have some hardware that's not yet a year old, so I do keep this one up to date. > (granted, unless you read all the lists it is easy to miss this sort of > thing). Do you recommend any in particular for this? Gentoo-dev, perhaps? --->8 > I ended up bailing on gentoo-sources all the same. Not that there was > really anything wrong with it, but since I'm running btrfs and they've > had a history of nasty regressions that tend to show up MONTHS later > I've been a lot more picky about my kernel updates. I'm currently > tracking 4.1. I might think about moving to 4.4 in a little while. Well, according to eix, there's only 4.4.19 between 4.1.30 and 4.7.2. > I tend to stay on the next-to-most-recent longterm not long after a new > longterm is announced. That tends to give them enough time to work > out the bugs. Plus, I spend a lot less time playing with > configuration options this way (they don't change within a minor > version). Sound policy, I'm sure. How does an ordinary mortal know which versions are here for the long term? -- Rgds Peter
