Hello. This is not entirely true anymore. Check out the article on the back page of the latest Linux Journal (November 2004). They have a write up of how the kernel development process has changed in the last couple of years, and how the old even/odd numbering scheme is not what it once was. Sorry I can't provide a link for the article, but the LJ site (http://www.linuxjournal.com/) seems to think that the October issue is still the current one. Bye for now, Stuart. -----Original Message----- From: JW [mailto:jw@mailsw.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 4:01 PM To: suse-linux-e@suse.com Subject: Re: [SLE] http://www.kernel.org/ any good? AJ >On Tuesday, 12 October 2004 01.34, Patrick B. O'Brien wrote: AJ >> Any body ever go out to the http://www.kernel.org/ site, grab and update AJ >> their kernel? AJ > AJ >yes, I've done it once or twice AJ > AJ >> How did it go, AJ > AJ >Sometimes well, sometimes not so well. Now that kernel.org has abandoned AJ >the "even means stable, odd means development" thing, getting vanilla AJ >kernels has become even more of a crap shoot than it was before. What are you talking about abandoning the version number scheme? .1, .3, .5, .7 etc are development kernels.