Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
Horms wrote: Debian isn't lowering priority on Linux 2.4 work but individual people are. I am one of the people who do work on 2.4 for debian, I won't raise the hands of others. Personally my focus is 2.4.27, because that is what will go into sarge and right now I don't have the time to do 2.4.27 and 2.4.28. And to be honest I think that any surplus time would be best spent working on 2.6 as that is a mountain of work. The reason kernel-source-2.4.28 is unfinished is because I'm waiting for Herbert Xu to release an IPsec patch for 2.4.28. Once that happens we can see about getting it in the archive and tested. Hope this status update quells any other concerns.. -- Joshua Kwan signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:23:18PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote: On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 08:02:25PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: Converting to udev is an additional step, and caused me a lot more work than the basic 2.6 upgrade (mostly getting my head around it, and converting from usbmgr). Converting to udev is in no way a part of converting to a 2.6 kernel. Not even if you're using devfs. Only people unfortunate enough to be using Gnome 2.8 are required to have udev running. I'm running gnome 2.8 just fine without udev
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 08:44:13AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 09:23:18PM -0800, Marc Wilson wrote: On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 08:02:25PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: Converting to udev is an additional step, and caused me a lot more work than the basic 2.6 upgrade (mostly getting my head around it, and converting from usbmgr). Converting to udev is in no way a part of converting to a 2.6 kernel. Not even if you're using devfs. Only people unfortunate enough to be using Gnome 2.8 are required to have udev running. I'm running gnome 2.8 just fine without udev AOL. magicdev works just fine to do essentially the same thing as gnome-volume-manager. udev. Just say no. -- EARTH smog | bricks AIR -- mud -- FIRE soda water | tequila WATER -- with thanks to fortune
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Thu, Jan 06, 2005 at 12:33:00PM +0100, Wouter Verhelst wrote: AOL. magicdev works just fine to do essentially the same thing as gnome-volume-manager. I don't use magicdev either. I really prefer to mount my storage device myself. Call me a control-freak.
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 09:18:33PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 08:16:44PM +, Tim Cutts wrote: 2.6 is still too new as far as most ISVs are concerned, and so Debian shouldn't lower the priority of work on 2.4 kernels too much just yet, in my opinion. Debian isn't lowering priority on Linux 2.4 work but individual people are. I am one of the people who do work on 2.4 for debian, I won't raise the hands of others. Personally my focus is 2.4.27, because that is what will go into sarge and right now I don't have the time to do 2.4.27 and 2.4.28. And to be honest I think that any surplus time would be best spent working on 2.6 as that is a mountain of work. If someone wants to work on getting 2.4.28 up to scratch that would be great. But it won't go into testing before sarge is released. Also if anyone has backports from 2.4.28 I would be happy to consider them for 2.4.27. -- Horms
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 08:02:25PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: On 02-Jan-05, 15:54 (CST), Stephan Niemz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By the way, is there a guide somewhere telling how to switch an unstable system from 2.4 to 2.6? apt-get install kernel-image-2.6.whatever Also module-init-tools. I got burnt by this recently when I modularised my kernel and was mystified that my network card had disappeared. -- Paul TBBle Hampson, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 7th year CompSci/Asian Studies student, ANU Shorter .sig for a more eco-friendly paperless office. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 08:02:25PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: Converting to udev is an additional step, and caused me a lot more work than the basic 2.6 upgrade (mostly getting my head around it, and converting from usbmgr). Converting to udev is in no way a part of converting to a 2.6 kernel. Not even if you're using devfs. Only people unfortunate enough to be using Gnome 2.8 are required to have udev running. Udev. Just say no. -- Marc Wilson | Those who can't write, write manuals. [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
I demand that Stephan Niemz may or may not have written... On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 20:02:25 -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: Converting to udev is an additional step, and caused me a lot more work than the basic 2.6 upgrade (mostly getting my head around it, and converting from usbmgr). Yes, converting from devfs to udev is one thing that doesn't seem to be easy. ISTM that whether it's easy depends on whether your devices are adequately represented in sysfs and the udev rules files. (I'm still using a script to create /dev/dvb/*, although if I upgrade to drivers in a newer kernel or CVS, I won't need that.) Another one is the ISDN support. Hasn't that changed significantly, too? No idea. And what's going to happen with /etc/modutils/*, how much manual tweaking would be needed there? [...] None at all, but you may want to tweak things in /etc/modprobe.d/ instead. ;-) -- | Darren Salt | linux (or ds) at | nr. Ashington, | woody, sarge, | youmustbejoking | Northumberland | RISC OS | demon co uk | Toon Army | I don't ask for much, just untold riches... rm -rf /
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
Quoting Darren Salt [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I demand that Stephan Niemz may or may not have written... On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 20:02:25 -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: Converting to udev is an additional step, and caused me a lot more work than the basic 2.6 upgrade (mostly getting my head around it, and converting from usbmgr). Yes, converting from devfs to udev is one thing that doesn't seem to be easy. ISTM that whether it's easy depends on whether your devices are adequately represented in sysfs and the udev rules files. (I'm still using a script to create /dev/dvb/*, although if I upgrade to drivers in a newer kernel or CVS, I won't need that.) I don't have any special devices, and a recent attempt to switch to udev ended in going right back to devfs. I am running 2.6.8 and don't have anything strange in my setup. It just didn't work. I was also unable to find any decent documentation about making such a switch. Maybe it's just been too long since I looked, but I am not really interested in spending the time again unless I am certain it will work. -Roberto Sanchez This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 20:02:25 -0600, Steve Greenland wrote: Converting to udev is an additional step, and caused me a lot more work than the basic 2.6 upgrade (mostly getting my head around it, and converting from usbmgr). Yes, converting from devfs to udev is one thing that doesn't seem to be easy. Another one is the ISDN support. Hasn't that changed significantly, too? And what's going to happen with /etc/modutils/*, how much manual tweaking would be needed there? And I'm sure there is more. - Stephan. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
By the way, is there a guide somewhere telling how to switch an unstable system from 2.4 to 2.6? An install of the appropinquate kernel-image package should do it. At least it did for me on various ppc and an x86_64 installed as i386 system.
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 10:19:57AM +0100, Stephan Niemz wrote: Yes, converting from devfs to udev is one thing that doesn't seem to be easy. Another one is the ISDN support. Hasn't that changed significantly, too? And what's going to happen with /etc/modutils/*, how much manual tweaking would be needed there? And I'm sure there is more. I haven't used either devfs nor udev so I can't comment on that. ISDN should be fine nowdays - while there's been quite a lot of ISDN changes there's nothing that's different from the usersland POV.
Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
The kernel version 2.4.28 is out for almost seven weeks now. Does anybody know about the status of the corresponding Debian packages? And is there an estimation for when the kernel-patch-* packages will support the new kernel version? Thanks, - Stephan. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 07:37:59PM +0100, Stephan Niemz wrote: The kernel version 2.4.28 is out for almost seven weeks now. Does anybody know about the status of the corresponding Debian packages? And is there an estimation for when the kernel-patch-* packages will support the new kernel version? There's an unfinished 2.4.28 kernel-source package in the debian-kernel SVN repository. For me and several other members of the debian kernel team 2.4 packages have been a much lower priority than 2.6 packages. Given that and that sarge will release with 2.4.27 anyway I'm not sure when a 2.4.28 package will get into unstable. Any reason you're not using 2.6 kernels?
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On 2 Jan 2005, at 7:16 pm, Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 07:37:59PM +0100, Stephan Niemz wrote: The kernel version 2.4.28 is out for almost seven weeks now. Does anybody know about the status of the corresponding Debian packages? And is there an estimation for when the kernel-patch-* packages will support the new kernel version? There's an unfinished 2.4.28 kernel-source package in the debian-kernel SVN repository. For me and several other members of the debian kernel team 2.4 packages have been a much lower priority than 2.6 packages. Given that and that sarge will release with 2.4.27 anyway I'm not sure when a 2.4.28 package will get into unstable. Any reason you're not using 2.6 kernels? There are plenty of reasons not to use 2.6 kernels. I'd love to use 2.6 for everything, but in many cases at work I can't. There are too many kernel modules from third party sources (some of which are binary -- yes I know, but sometimes we have to just live with the idiots in some commercial software and hardware companies) which just don't support 2.6 yet. Having said that, for such machines I tend not to upgrade the kernel much anyway, since the same idiotic companies usually have strict support matrices for the exact kernel version they support. 2.6 is still too new as far as most ISVs are concerned, and so Debian shouldn't lower the priority of work on 2.4 kernels too much just yet, in my opinion. Tim -- Dr Tim Cutts GPG: 1024/D FC81E159 5BA6 8CD4 2C57 9824 6638 C066 16E2 F4F5 FC81 E159 PGP.sig Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 08:16:44PM +, Tim Cutts wrote: 2.6 is still too new as far as most ISVs are concerned, and so Debian shouldn't lower the priority of work on 2.4 kernels too much just yet, in my opinion. Debian isn't lowering priority on Linux 2.4 work but individual people are.
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On Sun, Jan 02, 2005 at 20:16:19 +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: Any reason you're not using 2.6 kernels? Yes. I'd like to switch to 2.6, but I suspect it would break certain things. There are too many changes and I don't have the time to go through this at the moment. Still I'd like to have a recent kernel running. So maybe I should try to compile 2.4.28 on my own while hoping that the kernel patches I'm using still work. :-( By the way, is there a guide somewhere telling how to switch an unstable system from 2.4 to 2.6? Thanks, - Stephan. signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Status of Kernel 2.4.28 packages?
On 02-Jan-05, 15:54 (CST), Stephan Niemz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: By the way, is there a guide somewhere telling how to switch an unstable system from 2.4 to 2.6? apt-get install kernel-image-2.6.whatever Seriously, that Worked For Me. It wasn't a big deal. However, as usual, It depends: If you're running LVM or EVMS, you'll need the appropriate updated user-space toolset. If you're *booting* off an LVM or EVMS volume, it becomes much harder, I think. Converting to udev is an additional step, and caused me a lot more work than the basic 2.6 upgrade (mostly getting my head around it, and converting from usbmgr). Steve -- Steve Greenland The irony is that Bill Gates claims to be making a stable operating system and Linus Torvalds claims to be trying to take over the world. -- seen on the net
