On Thu, 2003-08-21 at 12:50, Keith Owens wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Aug 2003 00:28:37 -0700,
> Jamie Krasnoo <krasnooj@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >Looking at the list of patches to download for the 2.4.20 kernel I see a
> >few of them are available. I'm not sure which one to use. Do I use rc3
> >or the one with the most recent date on it?
>
> I assume you mean the split patches in
> ftp://oss.sgi.com/projects/xfs/download/patches.
> It contains these directories
>
> 2.4.20
> 2.4.20-2002-11-29_01:21_UTC
> 2.4.20-2002-12-18_02:00_UTC
> 2.4.20-2003-01-14_00:43_UTC
> 2.4.20-2003-02-05_23:39_UTC
> 2.4.20-2003-03-19_04:55_UTC
> 2.4.20-rc3
>
> 2.4.20-rc3 is against Marcelo's 2.4.20-rc3 (release candidate) which
> precedes 2.4.20 proper. The 2.4.20*UTC directories are older versions
> of the XFS patches against 2.4.20. 2.4.20 is the last XFS patch
> against 2.4.20. Remember that the README says
>
> The -all and -split patches are provided as a courtesy and are not
> supported.
> They are snapshots of the XFS CVS tree as of the specified date and time,
> the
> split patches may or may not be changed afterwards. The main method of XFS
> distribution is via the XFS CVS tree, if you want an up to date version of
> XFS
> then use CVS.
>
> 2.4.20 is quite old now, both from the kernel and XFS point of view, it
> was last updated on April 7. You should upgrade to 2.4.21 if possible.
>
Thanks Keith much appreciated.
|