Hello, On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 11:29:32AM -0600, dann frazier wrote: > Is the plan to do a "linux-2.6.16" upload at the same time, or does > this imply a decision to use >= 2.6.17 in etch? We have not yet decided about what to use for etch. There has not been any more commitment towards a long-term support for 2.6.16 on LKML, but maybe the last word is not spoken here yet. Anyone who knows more about it? Here two proposals on how to go on, satisfying the need of a stable 2.6.16 for testing and the need of 2.6.17 for the architectures broken in 2.6.16 (at least sparc, mipsel): 1. we upload 2 source packages: linux-2.6.16 version 2.6.16-15 and linux-2.6 version 2.6.17-1. This will allow us to upload 2.6.17 ASAP, and to continue 2.6.16 support until the etch release kernel decision is made. 2. we upload linux-2.6 2.6.16-15 on Monday with urgency=high and have it added to testing ASAP, and upload linux-2.6.17-1 on Friday (5 days later), probably with XEN images in place, and one round of NEW less. With this option, taking care of 2.6.16 in testing could be done through t-p-u uploads. I personally would like to follow option #1: We could backport sparc/niagara and smp-alt support if 2.6.16 gets long-term support, we would have a stable kernel for etch until 2.6.17 stabilizes, and we had enough time to decide which kernel to release with. Best regards Frederik Schueler -- ENOSIG
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature