My understanding is that we used to have up-to-date files on the official kernel mirror FTP server and now the HTTP server that guided us in each subdirectory when there was a new Linux kernel release, amongst other things, so we didn't have to scroll down when loading the directory. This isn't only an question, it's also a concern. There are various "LATEST-IS-x.y.z" files that have been removed from the kernel mirrors with each new release, and I'm concerned that these are actually licensed source code that should have been kept along with the official kernel release, at the least. There may have been some Slashdot commentary about this many years ago. I think I may have downloaded some of these but I don't know if the timestamp was kept. I'm assuming that the missing LATEST-IS kernel files along with their timestamp differential payload are or were GNU GPL licensed, but I can't verify that here with information that's available in the kernel source code or the official documentation. As you know, filesystems and protocols have always been a bit tricky when a timestamp is necessary. I've been on-board as a Linux user since kernel version 1.2.13 and all the problems with Microsoft Windows back in 1995. I'm utilizing the kernel.org mirror at the following world-wide-web address: < https://mirrors.edge.kernel.org/pub/linux/ > ``` total 4 -rw-r--r-- 1 drw drw 0 Mar 1 1995 LATEST-IS-1.1.95 -rw-r--r-- 1 drw drw 0 Aug 1 1995 LATEST-IS-1.2.13 -rw-r--r-- 1 drw drw 0 Jun 8 1996 LATEST-IS-2.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 drw drw 0 Feb 8 2004 LATEST-IS-2.0.40 -rw-r--r-- 1 drw drw 0 Jan 25 1999 LATEST-IS-2.2.0 -rw-r--r-- 1 drw drw 0 Feb 24 2004 LATEST-IS-2.2.26 -rw-r--r-- 1 drw drw 0 May 23 2000 LATEST-IS-2.3.99-pre9 -rw-r--r-- 1 drw drw 138 Jul 8 1997 WARNING-2.1.44 ``` [ 0.000000] Linux version 6.1.88 (drw@linux) (Debian clang version 16.0.6 (15~deb11u2), GNU ld (GNU Binutils for Debian) 2.35.2) #1 SMP PREEMPT_DYNAMIC Sat Apr 27 20:52:35 EDT 2024 I'd appreciate any information you folks have about what happened to the stray "LATEST-IS" source files. I'll keep the severity setting of this soon-to-be submitted bug report as the server suggested.
The LATEST-IS files were last created over 20 years ago, for kernel 2.5.75. Sorry, but I don't exactly understand what you are asking. They aren't source files.
It is a concern about what is and what is not licensed Linux payload offered for download and distribution via the distribution server. There are people who need to support the presence of those files at various configurations in time, where only one was supplied with an official distribution timestamp of authentication, which may have varied. A kernel distributor should not have to clone a developer's task and work to recreate an official file from the distribution server, as that goes into authorship rights and licensing of the original authentic protected work. I consider the file handle and the file's timestamp to be protected as expression covered by license, unless it's ultimately an unlicensed file, upon which I would understand the disposable run that the LATEST-IS series of releases has had at kernel. If nothing else as resolution, I'd like clarification about the licensing status of the 'LATEST-IS' series as it signifies a novel unidentified notification effort meant to alleviate burden in the directory. I'll keep this as resolved pending resolution, as the zero-byte status of the file is being respected above the statefulness and utility or necessity of the original timestamp. Thank you for your interest.