GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I mean, for instance, the version of an operating system. And by stable I would rather mean reliable. I know a 10.9 kernel has many minor modifications where as the change to a major version number, 11 in this case, involves sort of a design from scratch. Well, that's a question.
I mean, for instance, the version of an operating system. And by stable I would rather mean reliable. I know a 10.9 kernel has many minor modifications where as the change to a major version number, 11 in this case, involves sort of a design from scratch. Well, that's a question.
"Generally(!) speaking," I suggest that the rule-of-thumb goes more or less like this:
"If [only] the rightmost digit changes," stay asleep.
"But if any other digit changes," pay attention!
But also (and within the foregoing rule-of-thumb ...) "distro" publishers are actually also quite clear(!) as to precisely what they consider to be "stable," or not.
Developers are always quite(!) clear as to what they intend to "release to the [potential ...] 'general public,'" versus what they are merely intent to release 'to nerds!'
And, "all of that having now been said," frankly nothing is ever "a design from scratch." Yessirree, we are always marching forward . . .
"And, If ye be so inclined ..." aye, "if ye dare ... then ... then(!) ... then ye surely be surely welcome to drop by ... "the developer forums" ... 'Abandon All Hope, Ye Who Enter Here" ;-) ... to see for yerself exactly(!) How The Magick™ Is Done ...
But, hey, why not leave your calling-card here with me. So that I can, y'know, hand it graciously to your next of kin . . . . . .
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 02-06-2017 at 08:50 PM.
And, "all of that having now been said," frankly nothing is ever "a design from scratch." Yessirree, we are always marching forward . . .
"And, If ye be so inclined ..." aye, "if ye dare ... then ... then(!) ... then ye surely be surely welcome to drop by ... "the developer forums" ... 'Abandon All Hope, Ye Who Enter Here" ;-) ... to see for yerself exactly(!) How The Magick™ Is Done ...
But, hey, why not leave your calling-card here with me. So that I can, y'know, hand it graciously to your next of kin . . . . . .
As an afterthought, stf92, what exactly are you trying to accomplish?
To make a long story short, I am trying to establish wifi communications under slackware 9.0, the device being an RT3090 and it seems that's a very difficult task. So, as new slackware versions do have a drive able to manage that device, I was thinking of just writing an ad hoc driver. I have the new slackware version driver sources and, so, I already have that part of the driver that looks towards the device. All I need is to modify the part looking towards the kernel.
To accomplish the task, I've just downloaded Rubini's Linux Device Drivers as a hands-on-guide and hope to spend some nice time writing a driver.
When I was starting out with computers, I was told not to trust any package with a minor version number of zero, because it was only one step up from the beta release. A minor version of "1" meant that the new bugs had been taken out.
When I was starting out with computers, I was told not to trust any package with a minor version number of zero, because it was only one step up from the beta release. A minor version of "1" meant that the new bugs had been taken out.
When I was starting out with computers, I was told not to trust any package with a minor version number of zero, because it was only one step up from the beta release. A minor version of "1" meant that the new bugs had been taken out.
Emacs makes the first major release with the minor number set to "1", e.g., the first Emacs 25 release was 25.1, and the upcoming 25.2 will have the new bugs taken out.
Clearly, this is specifically intended to trick hazel
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.