On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 05:00:34AM +0200, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote: > On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 07:51:29PM -0700, Greg KH wrote: > > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 04:41:01AM +0200, Michael Biebl wrote: > > > 2014-05-30 4:32 GMT+02:00 Michael Biebl <mbi...@gmail.com>: > > > > 2014-05-30 4:26 GMT+02:00 Greg KH <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>: > > > > > > > >> You update systemd but you don't update the kernel? How does that make > > > >> any sense? > > > > > > > > There might be very valid reasons why you need to stick with the old > > > > kernel. As said, one example could be that the new one simply doesn't > > > > boot. Requiring lock-step upgrades makes the system less > > > > fault-tolerant. > > > > So where possible this should be avoided. > > > > > > What I'm trying to say here is: let's rip this code out once all > > > stable distros out there in the wild ship a kernel with builti-in > > > firmware loader support, but please not before. > > > > What is "all"? > > > > Do we really have to wait 10+ years just because some random disto > > doesn't want to update their kernel? > > > > Since when does systemd care about what random distros do? > It should. I'd hardly call Debian a random distro.
It's a slow moving distro. If it takes 5 years for their next stable release, why should we be forced to maintain code that no one else uses? > They are bound to have lots of issues with the conversion to systemd > as the default on their wide range of supported systems. Keep such > compatibility stuff around just makes things easier for everyone. Even > for us, the cost of maintaining some ifdef-ed code is lower than > handling the additional bug reports from people who compile their own > systemd. Then it could be made into a simple patch for those distros that require obsolete kernels :) > > > Keeping the userspace firmware loader for a little longer costs us > > > nothing and simplifies things for downstreams. So let's be nice to > > > them. I don't see a good reason to rush the removal of the userspace > > > firmware loader. > > > > Why not just port the in-kernel firmware loader to those kernel > > versions? That solves more problems than sticking with this code > > does... > This doesn't readily solve the problem with requiring lock-step > upgrades. You first have to deploy the updated kernel, then install > newer systemd. You can install a new systemd then say that no more firmware loading will happen until you reboot with your new kernel that you install afterwards. As firmware loading is usually a boot-only event, or a "add a new device" event, I don't see that as a major restriction, do you? thanks, greg k-h _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel