I gmane.linux.kernel, skrev Blaisorblade: > Forgot drivers testing? That is where most of the bugs are hidden, and where > wide user testing is definitely needed because of the various hardware bugs > and different configurations existing in real world.
A way that could raise the testing upon a particular kernel, would be to provide; (debian example follows): ... example .. An apt-repository with the newest tagged kernel build modular for the architecture. Just drop all tagged kernels in a common repository that the users can follow, then I'd be happy to test a new kernel on every reboot on my system. I'd probably still would respond if anything was broken in the new kernel.. Then it wouldn't be: "try this patch and see if that solves anything" but do: apt-get install kernel-image-386-torvalds-linux-2.6-v2.6.13-rc3 (automatically build from the "torvalds/linux-2.6"-branch with tag "v2.6.13-rc3" using a modular kernel-configuration similar to the one used in the stock debian kernels. Then I find and report something and "Pavel Machek" releases a "try-fix", by tagging a branch ind a tree and tells me to try kernel-image-386-pavel-good-2.6-v2.6.13-rc3 instead. (and variations.. acip/no-acip smp, etc. etc. ) ... example end .. It would be quite a lot central kernel-building, but as far as I can see, it can be fully automated. It would defininately lower the barrier for being able to paticipate in testing, but I am not the one to decide if that would be a desirable goal? Or for that matter, worth the work. Jesper -- ./Jesper Krogh, [EMAIL PROTECTED], Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/