my bet:

15.0 gonna be the next Slackware yet

gonna ship with 5.10.x (LTS)

gonna ship 5.12+ (most likely not the very first 5.12.x)

we're gonna chase the 5.12.x branch for recent hardware and those who run "production servers" will only update the (presumably more peaceful) 5.10.x on bug fix releases.

as we had it in the 2.2/2.4 days (those where the days...)

When I was tracking 5.10 (until .16) I had quite a few non-fatal video issues with an AMD Radeon HD 7970 - e.g. total screen corruption after suspend/resume which 5.11 fixed (at least eventually). I don't have any such cards but there's a lot of RDNA2 stuff that only went in to .12+ as well.

5.11 will be EOL too soon though so it wont be that.

Linus Torvalds said :
Wait and see ...

A smart way would be to have like it is now, 2 kernels, one LTS in k and another in testing.
Why should you say?
The kernel is not the most disruptive product for Slackware distribution. I see only one time PV moving backward with the choice of the kernel.
The testing kernel could be changing during the life of the stable 15.0 version, so when a new LTS kernel arrives in testing, after a suffisant time of stabilization, it could replace the first LTS version.

Could it be valuable to do so? Any remark?

Don't tell me, it has never been done like this, it's not a valuable argument, because it's the actual situation.

1 members found this post helpful.

I think upgrading the main/default could lead to issues for some. I remember reading someone is still rocking a 4.9 or 4.19 (I can't remember which) because newer ones were causing problems with their system.

However, not even taking that into account, upgrading the main kernel beyond the major kernel release goes against what we usually see for stable Slackware releases. The versions used in that stable release are typically frozen unless security/bug fixes require updates. With 5.10 getting at least another 20 months of support (and probably eventually 48 more months of support if it gets the 6 year bump like all previous LTS kernels since 4.4), that will allow Pat to provide the security fixes that will ultimately be needed. Since Slackware releases started using LTS kernels (14.0 in 2011), we haven't seen Pat deviate from that main kernel version when he's provided patches for the kernel.

I imagine that if the latest non-LTS kernel is provided in testing/ on release, that it won't see further upgrades for 15.0. However, the next -current probably will, and users will be able to use that kernel (or at least the config from that kernel) if they so desire on their stable release. I use Pat's 5.10 kernel as a starting point for my 5.10.x kernel on my 14.2 install.

It doesn't matter to me whether LTS or not, I'm going upgrade to the latest kernel as long as things are working. I respect Pat philosophy but it doesn't suit me to be behind.

For me, the slackware philosophy is exactly that :
provide a system reliable enough to meet my needs
And that in 99% of cases, mistakes come from me

1 members found this post helpful.

I rarely keep my desktop on the kernel included with the release, but my htpc will stick with the default kernel.

I just appreciate sane defaults, but appreciate it's easy for me to upgrade kernels or other packages on my own.

I've been wondering quite a bit how PV might handle the problem of Slackware release support cycles lasting much longer than kernel support cycles. Even an LTS kernel is expected to only be supported for a couple of years, these days.

My positive experiences with updating 14.1 systems with kernels from 14.2 make me think switching kernel versions mid-cycle might be feasible, but afaik that's not something Slackware has done before.

(Speculation alert)

It occurs to me that if PV were considering switching kernel versions mid-cycle, he might keep a newer kernel in testing/ as the successor candidate, so that when the time came to move it from testing/ to a/ it would at least have been tested by the community. Perhaps this is why 5.11 is in testing/?

Or he could have a completely different purpose in mind, like he anticipates switching to 5.11 before the 15.0 release, if it is tagged LTS. I don't know, just guessing.