Re: Really 2.6.18?
maximilian attems <maks@sternwelten.at> writes:
>> At least for XEN 2.6.17 has serious problems. I have three machines
>> that are unable to boot with 2.6.17 and them work fine with 2.6.18.
>
> the choice is out of discussion,
> 2.6.17 is not supported since long.
> and we focus on a good 2.6.18 release, look at the changelogs.. :)
I agree that 2.6.17 isn't a releasable kernel.
>> > Do we really want to release 2.6.18 with etch? If I alone am already
>> > able to identify two hard kernel freezes, there must be plenty
>> > others, no? Do we want to lock out users into 2.6.18 with its bugs?
>>
>> Well, we'll probably need to rely on bugfix releases of 2.6.18 after
>> etch is release too.
>
> well we want also a newer linux-image for etch in a mid-term release.
> that was not possible for sarge due to the heavy devfs dependency
> of core tools like initrd or d-i and so on..
But Maks, how we'll ensure that there's no regressions for our users?
Or the idea is to suply two installation medias? One with released
kernel and other with the "new" kernel? That would be great but would
push a lot of more work on d-i team.
--
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
E-mail: otavio@debian.org UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio
---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives
you the whole house."
Reply to: