Re: Coordinating efforts to get a new kernel in testing?
* Paul Wise [2009-07-12 09:57]: > > Like FTBFS of linux-modules-extra-2.6 on 3 architectures I guess? That > > seemed to me like a valid reason not to want to migrate .29 to testing. > > Also the armel linux-2.6 FTBFS: > > https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=linux-2.6;ver=2.6.30-2;arch=armel;stamp=1247068753 Thanks, I've fixed that. -- Martin Michlmayr http://www.cyrius.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Coordinating efforts to get a new kernel in testing?
On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 5:29 AM, Frans Pop wrote: > Like FTBFS of linux-modules-extra-2.6 on 3 architectures I guess? That > seemed to me like a valid reason not to want to migrate .29 to testing. Also the armel linux-2.6 FTBFS: https://buildd.debian.org/fetch.cgi?pkg=linux-2.6;ver=2.6.30-2;arch=armel;stamp=1247068753 -- bye, pabs http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Coordinating efforts to get a new kernel in testing?
On Saturday 11 July 2009, Luk Claes wrote: > > what are the remaining issues that you are concerned about? > > The ones that prevent linux-2.6 from migrating once it would be > unblocked. Like FTBFS of linux-modules-extra-2.6 on 3 architectures I guess? That seemed to me like a valid reason not to want to migrate .29 to testing. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Coordinating efforts to get a new kernel in testing?
maximilian attems wrote: > On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 01:08:05PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: >> It needs quite some work to get reverse dependencies handled and getting >> it built on all architectures. Both of which are the main responsability >> of the kernel team... > > it is mostly done, beside the strange cpio missing build dep, > that funnily surfaced now on i686. fixed in latest repo and > scheduled for upload latest on this upcoming week. > >>> Could this be prioritized by the involved teams (mostly kernel and >>> release, I'd guess) or are there already some plans for this to >>> happen? >> There are no plans to force anything in like some propose in such >> situations as there is no clear plan of the kernel team to get the >> remaining issues solved soon after it would be forced in. > > without force hints linux-2.6 goes nowhere. If you mean this in general then you are misinformed. If you mean atm, then you know the answer to your following question. > what are the remaining issues that you are concerned about? The ones that prevent linux-2.6 from migrating once it would be unblocked. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Coordinating efforts to get a new kernel in testing?
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 01:08:05PM +0200, Luk Claes wrote: > > It needs quite some work to get reverse dependencies handled and getting > it built on all architectures. Both of which are the main responsability > of the kernel team... it is mostly done, beside the strange cpio missing build dep, that funnily surfaced now on i686. fixed in latest repo and scheduled for upload latest on this upcoming week. > > Could this be prioritized by the involved teams (mostly kernel and > > release, I'd guess) or are there already some plans for this to > > happen? > > There are no plans to force anything in like some propose in such > situations as there is no clear plan of the kernel team to get the > remaining issues solved soon after it would be forced in. without force hints linux-2.6 goes nowhere. what are the remaining issues that you are concerned about? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Coordinating efforts to get a new kernel in testing?
Quoting Luk Claes (l...@debian.org): > > Could this be prioritized by the involved teams (mostly kernel and > > release, I'd guess) or are there already some plans for this to > > happen? > > There are no plans to force anything in like some propose in such > situations as there is no clear plan of the kernel team to get the > remaining issues solved soon after it would be forced in. So, could we get some input from the kernel team on this topic, then? Are you guys prioritizing work to get a new kernel in testing or work to get yet another upstream release in unstable? (from the above sentence and the discussion we had during the D-I team meeting, you probably understand where is my own preference going) signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Coordinating efforts to get a new kernel in testing?
Christian Perrier wrote: > During the last meeting of the D-I 'team' (ahem) which logs can be read > from http://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/Meetings, the situation > of the kernel packages wrt testing transition was raised. > > Apparently, having a new kernel in testing (whether this is 2.6.30 or > whatever other funky new version appears soon is not really relevant) > is quite hairy. It needs quite some work to get reverse dependencies handled and getting it built on all architectures. Both of which are the main responsability of the kernel team... > Could this be prioritized by the involved teams (mostly kernel and > release, I'd guess) or are there already some plans for this to > happen? There are no plans to force anything in like some propose in such situations as there is no clear plan of the kernel team to get the remaining issues solved soon after it would be forced in. Cheers Luk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-boot-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Coordinating efforts to get a new kernel in testing?
During the last meeting of the D-I 'team' (ahem) which logs can be read from http://wiki.debian.org/DebianInstaller/Meetings, the situation of the kernel packages wrt testing transition was raised. Apparently, having a new kernel in testing (whether this is 2.6.30 or whatever other funky new version appears soon is not really relevant) is quite hairy. Indeed hairy enough for this to not have happened since the release of lenny, 5 months ago. Among other things, that is a blocker for a release of D-I, which is otherwise nearly ready. From what was said during the D-I meeting (but more details can be bringed in by people who are more aware of this than me), a transition for D-I packages is similar to a library transition. http://release.debian.org/migration/testing.pl?package=linux-2.6 Could this be prioritized by the involved teams (mostly kernel and release, I'd guess) or are there already some plans for this to happen? (please respect Reply-To as -release is not meant to be a discussion list and the topic doesn't have much to do with D-I...except that we need this to happen for a release to happen) -- signature.asc Description: Digital signature
