[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Thinking about a "jessie and a half" release


Steve McIntyre <steve@einval.com> (2016-07-04):
> There's something I've been pondering for a while, along with some
> other folks - it might be useful to do a "jessie and a half" release,
> similarly to what we did in the etch days. That's *basically* just
> like a normal jessie release, but with a few key updates:
>  * backports kernel

That's a given.

>  * rebuilt d-i to match that kernel

You know there are patches around for that.

>  * X drivers

I don't see backports for them.

>  * ... (other things that might be needed for consistency)
> all rolled up with a small installer image build (netinst, maybe
> DVD#1).

That'd probably make it easy to decide how to resolve open questions
with my "d-i vs. backported kernel" patches.

> A lot of arm64 machine users would benefit from this, and maybe owners
> of very recent amd64 machines too, with better support for things on
> the Skylake platform. Those are the only two architectures I'm
> thinking of supporting at this point.
> Is anybody else interested in helping? Thoughts/comments?

 1. Is it going to pick pieces from backports only? (See X question
 2. Does it have to be called "jessie and a half"? (How much is the
    concept understood across users? Wouldn't it be a better idea to
    squeeze the "backports" concept into the name somehow?)
 3. What about security support once the system is installed? (Which
    can be answered along with 1., I suppose.)


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: