<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p>There's a little misunderstanding.<br>
We are supporting two rt-series. rt-lts which uses the latest LTS,
so currently linux44 as basekernel.<br>
The other series uses the latest available rt-patched kernel and
it used to be linux46 until very recently. Right now we were in
the process of shifting the rt(-non-lts) from linux46 to linux48.<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 22/10/16 22:41, Jonathon Fernyhough
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:6105ce39-13b0-5aa7-a8cf-57aea0ebaefe@manjaro.org"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">How many people use the RT kernels? Is it worth the effort supporting
three RT series in addition to all the 'normal' kernel series?
As I said in a previous post, we shouldn't be providing kernels that
aren't or can't be patched. If it's a choice between 1) a secure and
up-to-date kernel, and 2) meeting the needs of a niche group, we should
choose an up-to-date kernel.
On 22/10/16 21:35, Bernhard Landauer wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">well with 4.8-rt unfortunately I have four more extramodules that won't
build:
ndiswrapper, nvidiabl, open-vm-tools and r8168
Maybe it will be best for now to stick with 4.6 and apply the
dirtyCOW-patch with that one. Or should we provide rt without those
modules and tell people who need any of those modules to use rt-lts
instead? Doesn't seem nice...
What do you guys think?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
</pre>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
manjaro-dev mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:manjaro-dev@manjaro.org">manjaro-dev@manjaro.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.manjaro.org/mailman/listinfo/manjaro-dev">http://lists.manjaro.org/mailman/listinfo/manjaro-dev</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>