| ▲ | jmclnx an hour ago | |
> Linux kernel build based on the community's Long-Term Support (LTS) CopyFail only highlights why Companies want LTS. If there was a supported kernel built prior to 2017, most large companies would still be on that version, avoiding this issue all-together. The corporate mindset is usually "never upgrade unless there is new hardware needed or critical software failure". All CopyFail did was reinforce that mindset. I wonder if CopyFail will cause enterprises put pressure on the Linux Foundation to maintain a "ultra LTS" were it is supported for 20 years ? | ||
| ▲ | PunchyHamster an hour ago | parent | next [-] | |
> CopyFail only highlights why Companies want LTS. If there was a supported kernel built prior to 2017, most large companies would still be on that version, avoiding this issue all-together. Sadly not really how it works for say Red Hat. They routinely backport features while keeping whatever "stable" number on kernel. We even had displeasure of them backporting a bug... same bug to 2 different RHEL versions | ||
| ▲ | tempest_ 29 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | |
The longer you wait the more painful the switch will eventually be. | ||