Re: which kernel version for etch?
hello,
On Thu, 11 May 2006, dann frazier wrote:
> On Tue, May 09, 2006 at 11:46:32PM +0200, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> > Fellow Debian kernel team members,
> >
> > let's take the recent "bits from the release team"[1] as an opportunity
> > to start discussing which kernel version we, the Debian kernel team,
> > want Etch to release with.
<snipp>
> > Considering the current upstream 2.6 development model on one side,
> > and Adrian Bunks intention to maintain 2.6.16.x for the next 2-3 years
> > on the other side - backporting drivers and other updates like the 2.4
> > line is handled -, makes the 2.6.16.x line an ideal candidate for the
> > purpose of a release kernel for Etch.
>
> I agree; at this point 2.6.16.x looks ideal. I stress "at this point"
> though; we of course shouldn't make this decision irreversible.
> Especially if, as Sven noted, Andrew Morton decides to maintain a .17
> or .18 in a similar manner.
i disagree for the 2.6.16 choice, will point out the args as following.
* sarge released with an more than one year old kernel
that was bad as new hardware from the sarge release day on was not
supported (d-i jump to the vc2 wget newer image and be fine sure,
but that is not the support d-i customers deserve).
especially bad as the 2.6.8 acpi was crap, the sata support almost null,
vm bad under high load or mem pressure, nfs flacky..
2.6.16 was released on Mar 2006, if the next release gets out of the door
dec/jan 2006/07 we get this same bad situation of an year old kernel to
support.
* ubuntu dapper has not released yet but their drivers/ beside wierd
additions looks much more than 2.6.17 than the 2.6.15 they targetted
benc is using a _full_ man work-week to backport fixes.
* stable updates allowing a full kernel upgrade?
from 2.6.8 - 2.6.15 sysfs as an user exported interface saw big
fluctuations. it is questionable if without newer userspace (hald, udev)
the kernel can be upgraded.
* 2.6.16 long term support is unknown as no other 2.6 kernel
saw such a treatement.
* lack of features missing in 2.6.16 is already a big list
(smp alternatives, niagara support, raid5 resize, 32 bit iptables on 64
bit kernel, rtc cleanup with faster boot, atapi turned on by default,
huge alsa upgrade)
for a full list see kernelnewbies wiki
-> http://wiki.kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_17
* acpi tree missed 2.6.17 2 week dev phase
http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=114410197218161&w=2
will be merged 2.6.18.
2.6.18 seems a good target atm as it will be fresh enough on release date,
but still leave enough time to backport fixes only.
regards
--
maks
Reply to: