Linux 2.4.2{3,4} + vulnerabilities.

Matthew Burgess matthew at
Sat Jan 24 10:07:01 PST 2004

On Sat, 24 Jan 2004 10:49:57 -0700
Gerard Beekmans <gerard at> wrote:

> When branching was first brought up, we decided it was overkill for
> our uses. Has this opinion changed lately?

I don't think this has been discussed recently, if it has then ignore
the rest of this.  I don't think that branching is overkill for our
purposes.  It will allow CVS HEAD to always be kept bleeding edge, in
terms of package versions and other interesting stuff that we
may/should not want to put into a nearly ready to release version of the
book.  It also allows 5.1 to go through a stabilisation process,
including sufficient testing, without being affected by any potentially
big changes to HEAD.  Note though that the package version argument in
this case is almost redundant in this particular case as they're
all up to date aside from the man-pages.


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list