kernel fork question

[zeroth404]

as far as I've been lead to believe, 2.6 is a fork of 2.4 where 2.4 stopped production to become stable. same with 2.4 and 2.2, etc.

Well, work is still beign done on 2.4 to make it more stable, so are thoes changes also made to 2.6, or is 2.6 so much different now that it no longer even remotely resembles 2.4?

eh

[techieMoe]

That's probably a great question, but I haven't the foggiest idea how to answer, so instead I'll just tap-dance.

*tap-dances around the question*

[Vergil83]

as far as I've been lead to believe, 2.6 is a fork of 2.4 where 2.4 stopped production to become stable. same with 2.4 and 2.2, etc.

Well, work is still beign done on 2.4 to make it more stable, so are thoes changes also made to 2.6, or is 2.6 so much different now that it no longer even remotely resembles 2.4?

eh

I don't think that is correct. I have always understood that 2.6 is 2.4 that has newer stuff added. For example, 2.4 doesn't have alsa, but 2.6 does. So I think most of the work done on 2.6 has been for features not avaible in 2.4.

I am sure they share bug fixes and stuff like that, just as the people that add stuff to the kernel at the distributions send fixes back to the kernel.