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

Re: New kernel-source-2.6.7 upload ?



On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 08:42:46AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 07:57:16AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> >> There's a major security update pending, so we'll need to upload new
> >> kernel images for everything in the universe in short order anyway.
> 
> On Thu, Aug 05, 2004 at 05:10:49PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Ok. Should i go ahead and ask Jens a kernel-source and kernel-patch-powerpc
> > rebuild, or wait for the new security update ? Will this new security update
> > go into 2.6.8 and the release of it is waiting for it ? Should we even be
> > speaking of that publicly here ?
> 
> Marcelo posted a 2.4 prerelease that included fixes for it, so I
> presume it's okay to mention publicly. I think it's slated for 2.6.8 on

Ok.

> the 2.6 side. I'd say to try to piggyback it atop the 2.6.8 release
> unless that doesn't make sense for some other reason or it looks like
> it's going to take longer than your patience will last.

Ok, so i will ask Jens to make a new upload, and we will ride the 2.6.8
release once it actually happened. Waiting for things is not a good idea at
this time.

Jens, can you either : 

  o make an upload of kernel-source 2.6.7-4 and another one of
  kernel-patch-powerpc 2.6.7-5. The powerpc kernel should be of urgency high,
  so it enters testing quickly.

or :

  o wait until the current powerpc kernel enters testing and then make the
  upload.

I have a preference for the first solution, as the changes of the powerpc
kernel are rather minor and should not affect anything outside the pegasos
changes, which are well tested.

This would also allow for d-i to be in sync between the kernel used to build
the d-i initrd's (taken from sid) and the one which is actually installed
(taken from sarge). 

Don't forget to remove the pegasos.diff and g4-errata.diff patches from the
powerpc patches before you upload 2.6.7-5.

Friendly,

Sven Luther




Reply to: