Re: Uploading linux (3.2.60-1)
On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 19:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 18:59 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
> > On Sun, 2014-06-29 at 04:14 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2014-06-11 at 16:39 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > > I intend to upload linux version 3.2.60-1 to stable-proposed-updates at
> > > > the weekend. Let me know if there's a reason not to do this.
> > >
> > > I've just uploaded now.
> >
> > The upload has since had some wider exposure as a result of being used
> > as the basis for a security release. In the process, a few bugs have
> > been reported regarding regressions in networking - for instance,
> > #754173, #754197 and #754294.
>
> I think those are all the same bug.
Quite possibly.
> For what it's worth, my home router is running the new version without
> any such problem.
Thanks for the data point.
> > If it weren't for the security fix, I'd be inclined to suggest that we
> > skip 3.2.60 at this point, to give us more time to address the
> > regressions; that may still not be the worst idea, as it at least allows
> > people to easily downgrade to the current stable kernel.
> >
> > Thoughts welcome.
>
> As there aren't any major changes to hardware support in this version,
> there will be little benefit from rebuilding the installer using
> 3.2.60-1. So I'm OK with leaving wheezy as it is.
We already rebuilt the installer purely as a part of our process, but
I'd assumed that it would not be particularly affected by any of the
regressions.
> I'm hoping to be able to fix the regressions (probably with a revert) in
> another security update by the time of the point release.
That sounds good; thanks.
Regards,
Adam
Reply to: