[cwbriscoe]

Unfortunately my distro is at linux version 6.8. Looking forward to trying it out someday.

[eptcyka]

Unfortunately, ZFS doesn't support anything stable beyond 6.6.

[SirGiggles]

What do you mean by stable? 2.2.7 supports the 6.12 kernel if I'm not mistaken

[hamandcheese]

Of course, 2.2.7, what was released checks notes 1 hour ago. So I think GP was correct at the time of their post.

https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/releases/tag/zfs-2.2.7

[SirGiggles]

Then look back to 2.2.6, it supported up to 6.10. A far cry from only supporting only up to 6.6 so I'm not seeing where they were going with with their initial statement until they define what they mean by stable.

https://github.com/openzfs/zfs/releases/tag/zfs-2.2.6

Edit: changed sentence to make more sense

Edit 2: And if we are to interpret stable as in Linux LTS, then that would be 6.12 which is supported by 2.2.7 as you said

[hamandcheese]

Linux kernel 6.10 is EOL.

Non-LTS kernels very frequently go EOL before OpenZFS supports them, or there is only a very brief window that there is support for a non-EOL kernel.

In practice, it's hard to use a non-LTS kernel with openzfs for any significant duration.

[SirGiggles]

That's a fair point and I don't disagree. I guess my main point of contention was the implication that either a) ZFS wasn't stable on anything non-LTS or b) the Linux kernels themselves were unstable outside of a LTS.

What stable means in this case is subject to individual use cases. In my case, I don't find having to wait a bit for ZFS to catch up despite being on an EOL kernel to be catastrophic, but after having some time to think, I can see why someone would need an LTS kernel.

[gpm]

Switch distros?

[cwbriscoe]

Well 6.13 is bleeding edge, it just started it's RC cycle. I can wait until it is mainline.