Re: 2.6.7

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Thu, Jul 01, 2004 at 10:19:20AM +0900, Horms wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 04:01:16PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> > We really need to get 2.6.7 out in the open. How long has it been
> > already, two weeks or three maybe ?
> > 
> > Anyway, i am CCing ftpmasters, in hope to get some feedback.
> 
> [I did not CC them on this post, I think it is only relevant to debian-kernel]

Yep.

> > So, ftpmasters, i know you are probably busy either with other debian
> > stuff, or real life, but i would like to bring two points to your
> > attention :
> > 
> >   1) Well, there is this matter of the 2.6.7 kernel-source packages, as
> >   well as the port related patches packages which it would be nice to
> >   have in unstable quickly (at least on my box 2.6.7 solve a nasty box
> >   freeze, and i belive other rather important bugs are fixed by it).
> 
> Agreed.
> 
> >   2) In general, this waiting for each new kernel version for NEW queue
> >   processing is a bit problematic for good quality debian/kernel
> >   packaging, especially so near the sarge release (hopefully). I
> >   understand that they may be issues with just allowing the package in
> >   quickly, but i would like to know from you what we as debian kernel
> >   packager team can do to help you review the new packages quickly ?
> >   Some preprocessing of the diffs maybe or something such ? What do you
> >   usually do when examining a new kernel version ?
> 
> Should we really be tring to spin the kernel version repeatedly as we
> aproach sarge? Shouldn't we settle on a kernel that is going into sarge,
> one for 2.4 and one for 2.6 and work on making that as stable as
> possible? To me, constantly chasing new kernel versions doesn't seem to
> be the best way to get something rock solid for Sarge.

Definitively. Well at least for 2.6, but i have been painfully reminded
that 2.4.26 fixes some security holes not backported to 2.4.25.

Well, upstream makes new developement for their new release, but they
mostly fix broken stuff, and also get a new release out in a hurry when
there is a security issue. Backporting all of this may be fine for
stable, but too much work before the release, and work that is not
waranted, especially given the small amount of architectures who really
support 2.6 right now. And i can imagine what Christoph and William will
have to tell you about what you propose :), especially given their focus
on merging debian changes into the upstream kernel.

Sure, if its going to be month before the new packages escape the NEW
queue, ...

Friendly,

Sven Luther