Re: Sarge TODO items
On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 12:21:24PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> Well, you can check in the compressed tarball, in order to be sure it
> doesn't get lost or something. Less of a concern for kernel sources than
> random assorted packages though.
OK..
> > detail. The common .config bit is of course also important! I'd love
> > to move the fragments infrastructure of the 2.6 kernel-patch-powerpc
> > to the generic kernel.
>
> Yep, Jens did a great job on this.
>
> As for the revision system, i would vote for subversion over the more
> complicated arch. Many projects are using it already, Branden's X
> packages, debian-installer, the ocaml team, ...
subversions is fine with me. I'm not exactly happy with arch anyway,
it's a little too clumsy for my test.
So how do we move forward? Martin said he doesn't want major changes
for sarge anymore which kind makes sense.
One thing is we should certainly check all current kernel packaging into
SVN (minus kernel-patch-* that isn't used to build image, I think that
part is clearly out of reach for the kernel team).
For 2.2/2.4 let's follow his suggestion to not do any major changes,
let's just try to move everyone to a single kernel-source for the
patches to reduce overhead for the security team.
Given the feedback I've heard so far it seems like 2.6 for sarge will
only be for x86/alpha/ppc/ia64 and maybe s390. Given all of these don't
require major patches and 2.6 isn't the main kernel for sarge I'd love
to see a common packaging for those.
So first thing would be to get a slight change in the kernel-source
to actually allow us to apply multiple patches without bumping the
version number, and I'm kinda stuck with that, so if someone familar
with packaging could help out on that I'd be more than gratefull. And
if you & Jens could integrate the powerpc packages into that like alpha
I'd be a happy man already :)
Reply to: