From: Linus Torvalds <>
Subject: 2.2.0-final
Date: 1999/01/21
Message-ID: <>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 435278601
Original-Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1999 23:10:42 -0800 (PST)
Original-Message-ID: <>
To: Kernel Mailing List <>
X-Authentication-Warning: torvalds owned process doing -bs
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Orcpt: rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing-dig
Organization: Internet mailing list
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: fa.linux.kernel


 there's now a 2.2.0-pre9 on, and when you compile it it
will call itself 2.2.0-final. The reason is fairly obvious: enough is
enough, and I can't make pre-kernels forever, it just dilutes the whole
idea. The only reason the tar-file is not called 2.2.0 is that I want to
avoid having any embarrassing typos that cause it to not compile under
reasonable configurations or something like that. Unreasonable
configurations I no longer care about. 

Every program has bugs, and I'm sure there are still bugs in this. Get
over it - we've done our best, and nobody ever believed that there
wouldn't be 2.2.x kernels to fix problems as they come up, and delaying
2.2.0 forever is not an option.

I have a wedding anniversary and a company party coming up, so I'm taking
a few days off - when I get back I expect to take this current 2.2.0-final
and just remove the "-final" from the Makefile, and that will be it. I
suspect somebody _will_ find something embarrassing enough that I would
fix it too, but let's basically avoid planning on that.

In short, before you post a bug-report about 2.2.0-final, I'd like you to
have the following simple guidelines: 

 "Is this something Linus would be embarrassed enough about that he would
  wear a brown paper bag over his head for a month?"


 "Is this something that normal people would ever really care deeply

If the answer to either question is "probably not", then please consider
just politely discussing it as a curiosity on the kernel mailing lists
rather than even sending email about it to me: I've been too busy the last
few weeks, and I'd really appreciate it if I could just forget the worries
of a release for a few days.. 

But if you find something hilariously stupid I did, feel free to share it
with me, and we'll laugh about it together (and I'll avoid wearing the
brown paper bag on my head during the month of February). Do we have a

I've seen people working on a 2.2.0 announcement, and I'm happy - I've
been too busy to think straight, much less worry about details like that. 
If everything turns out ok, I'll have a few memorable bloopers in my
mailbox but nothing worse than that, and I can sit down and actually read
the announcement texts that people have been discussing. 

 - m68k sync
 - various minor driver fixes (irda, net drivers, scsi, video, isdn)
 - SGI Visual Workstation support
 - adjtimex update to the latest standards
 - vfat silly buglet fix
 - semaphores work on alpha again
 - drop the inline strstr() that gcc got wrong whatever we did
 - kswapd needed to be a bit more aggressive
 - minor TCP retransmission and delack fixes

Until Monday,


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

			  SCO's Case Against IBM

November 12, 2003 - Jed Boal from Eyewitness News KSL 5 TV provides an
overview on SCO's case against IBM. Darl McBride, SCO's president and CEO,
talks about the lawsuit's impact and attacks. Jason Holt, student and 
Linux user, talks about the benefits of code availability and the merits 
of the SCO vs IBM lawsuit. See SCO vs IBM.

Note: The materials and information included in these Web pages are not to
be used for any other purpose other than private study, research, review
or criticism.