Re: Upcoming stable point release (12.6)
On Fri, 2024-02-16 at 17:35 +, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > The next point release for "bookworm" (12.6) is scheduled for > Saturday, April 6th. Processing of new uploads into bookworm- > proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceeding weekend. Due to recent events, the point release has been postponed. A new date will be announced when possible. Regards, Adam
Upcoming oldstable point release (11.9)
Hi, The next point release for "bullseye" (11.9) is scheduled for Saturday, February 10th. Processing of new uploads into bullseye-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (12.5)
Hi, The next point release for "bookworm" (12.5) is scheduled for Saturday, February 10th. Processing of new uploads into bookworm-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (12.3)
Hi, The next point release for "bookworm" (12.3) is scheduled for Saturday, December 9th. Processing of new uploads into bookworm-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Bug#1036543: [PATCH 5.10 076/529] crypto: ccp: Use the stack for small SEV command buffers
Control: close -1 5.10.191-1 On Fri, 2023-05-26 at 17:36 +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Wed, 2023-05-17 at 16:06 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 04:02:35PM +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: > > > On Wed, May 17, 2023 at 02:56:21PM +0200, Ben Hutchings wrote: [..] > > > Julien Cristau reported a regression in ccp - the > > > > WARN_ON_ONCE(!virt_addr_valid(data)) is now being triggered. I > > > > believe > > > > this was introduced by the above commit, which depends on: > > > > > > > > commit 8347b99473a313be6549a5b940bc3c56a71be81c > > > > Author: Sean Christopherson > > > > Date: Tue Apr 6 15:49:48 2021 -0700 > > > > > > > > crypto: ccp: Play nice with vmalloc'd memory for SEV > > > > command structs > > > > > > > > Ben. > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for letting me know, now queued up. > > > > Nope, now dropped, it breaks the build :( > > I've now looked further and found that we need both: > > d5760dee127b crypto: ccp: Reject SEV commands with mismatching > command buffer > 8347b99473a3 crypto: ccp: Play nice with vmalloc'd memory for SEV > command structs > > (Not yet tested; I'll ask Julien if he can do that.) > Having just upgraded several affected debian.org nodes, I'm happy to confirm that the 5.10.191-1 kernel resolves the issue for us. Regards, Adam
Bug#1044518: linux: "RIP: 0010:get_xsave_addr+0x9b/0xb0" stacktrace in early boot with -24 bullseye kernel
On Sun, 2023-08-13 at 18:21 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > Since the kernels on both the host and guests were upgraded to > 5.10.179-5 (from 5.10.179-3), the guests on one of our Ganeti > clusters > have been reporting as tainted. Looking at dmesg shows the following > trace early in boot: > I realised that a little bit more of the surrounding context from dmesg might help: [0.093383] kvm-guest: setup PV IPIs [0.094931] ..TIMER: vector=0x30 apic1=0 pin1=2 apic2=-1 pin2=-1 [0.094968] clocksource: tsc-early: mask: 0x max_cycles: 0x1e33052aadd, max_idle_ns: 440795310221 ns [0.094974] Calibrating delay loop (skipped) preset value.. 4190.15 BogoMIPS (lpj=8380304) [0.095097] x86/cpu: User Mode Instruction Prevention (UMIP) activated [0.095106] [ cut here ] [0.095107] get of unsupported state [0.095120] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 0 at arch/x86/kernel/fpu/xstate.c:973 get_xsave_addr+0x9b/0xb0 [0.095122] Modules linked in: [0.095126] CPU: 0 PID: 0 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 5.10.0-24-amd64 #1 Debian 5.10.179-5 [0.095128] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), BIOS 1.14.0-2 04/01/2014 [0.095131] RIP: 0010:get_xsave_addr+0x9b/0xb0 [0.095134] Code: 48 83 c4 08 5b e9 15 80 bc 00 80 3d 8d 7c 80 01 00 75 a8 48 c7 c7 97 de eb 94 89 74 24 04 c6 05 79 7c 80 01 01 e8 f5 96 88 00 <0f> 0b 8b 74 24 04 eb 89 31 c0 e9 e6 7f bc 00 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 89 [0.095136] RSP: :95403ec8 EFLAGS: 00010282 [0.095139] RAX: RBX: 9566a600 RCX: 954b3768 [0.095141] RDX: c000efff RSI: efff RDI: 0247 [0.095142] RBP: 9566a4a0 R08: R09: 95403ce8 [0.095144] R10: 95403ce0 R11: 954cb7a8 R12: 0246 [0.095145] R13: R14: R15: [0.095148] FS: () GS:911abec0() knlGS: [0.095149] CS: 0010 DS: ES: CR0: 80050033 [0.095151] CR2: 911a95801000 CR3: 13e0a001 CR4: 007308b0 [0.095155] DR0: DR1: DR2: [0.095156] DR3: DR6: fffe0ff0 DR7: 0400 [0.095158] Call Trace: [0.095166] identify_cpu+0x51f/0x540 [0.095171] identify_boot_cpu+0xc/0x94 [0.095174] arch_cpu_finalize_init+0x5/0x47 [0.095177] start_kernel+0x4ec/0x599 [0.095183] secondary_startup_64_no_verify+0xb0/0xbb [0.095188] ---[ end trace 438682bdad114415 ]--- [0.095288] Last level iTLB entries: 4KB 0, 2MB 0, 4MB 0 [0.095289] Last level dTLB entries: 4KB 0, 2MB 0, 4MB 0, 1GB 0 [0.095296] Spectre V1 : Mitigation: usercopy/swapgs barriers and __user pointer sanitization Regards, Adam
Bug#1044518: linux: "RIP: 0010:get_xsave_addr+0x9b/0xb0" stacktrace in early boot with -24 bullseye kernel
Source: linux Version: 5.10.179-5 User: debian-ad...@lists.debian.org Usertags: needed-by-DSA-Team X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-ad...@lists.debian.org, a...@debian.org Hi, Since the kernels on both the host and guests were upgraded to 5.10.179-5 (from 5.10.179-3), the guests on one of our Ganeti clusters have been reporting as tainted. Looking at dmesg shows the following trace early in boot: [0.201347] RIP: 0010:get_xsave_addr+0x9b/0xb0 [0.201351] Code: 48 83 c4 08 5b e9 15 80 bc 00 80 3d 8d 7c 80 01 00 75 a8 48 c7 c7 97 de 6b b2 89 74 24 04 c6 05 79 7c 80 01 01 e8 f5 96 88 00 <0f> 0b 8b 74 24 04 eb 89 31 c0 e9 e6 7f bc 00 66 0f 1f 44 00 00 89 [0.201353] RSP: :b2c03ec8 EFLAGS: 00010282 [0.201356] RAX: RBX: b2e6a600 RCX: b2cb3768 [0.201358] RDX: c000efff RSI: efff RDI: 0247 [0.201359] RBP: b2e6a4a0 R08: R09: b2c03ce8 [0.201361] R10: b2c03ce0 R11: b2ccb7a8 R12: 0246 [0.201362] R13: R14: R15: [0.201365] FS: () GS:9588fbc0() knlGS: [0.201367] CS: 0010 DS: ES: CR0: 80050033 [0.201368] CR2: 9588f000 CR3: 8260a001 CR4: 007308b0 [0.201373] DR0: DR1: DR2: [0.201374] DR3: DR6: fffe0ff0 DR7: 0400 [0.201376] Call Trace: [0.201383] identify_cpu+0x51f/0x540 [0.201389] identify_boot_cpu+0xc/0x94 [0.201392] arch_cpu_finalize_init+0x5/0x47 [0.201395] start_kernel+0x4ec/0x599 [0.201401] secondary_startup_64_no_verify+0xb0/0xbb [0.201406] ---[ end trace d7d9074a88473cb2 ]--- The systems seem to be running OK, but the stacktrace presumably points to an issue somewhere. A sample kvm invocation for an affected guest is ganeti04 18354 30.1 0.5 6015620 1114084 ? Sl Aug11 832:22 /usr/bin/kvm -name geo1.debian.org -m 1024 -smp 2 -pidfile /var/run/ganeti/kvm-hypervisor/pid/geo1.debian.org -device virtio-balloon -daemonize -D /var/log/ganeti/kvm/geo1.debian.org.log -machine pc-i440fx-5.2 -monitor unix:/var/run/ganeti/kvm-hypervisor/ctrl/geo1.debian.org.monitor,server,nowait -serial unix:/var/run/ganeti/kvm-hypervisor/ctrl/geo1.debian.org.serial,server,nowait -usb -display none -cpu host -uuid 36cf5fbc-1414-4b27-874e-ea3153150aa9 -device virtio-rng-pci,bus=pci.0,addr=0x1e,max-bytes=1024,period=1000 -global isa-fdc.fdtypeA=none -netdev type=tap,id=nic-6e9afdf8-ccaf-42e8,fd=10 -device virtio-net-pci,id=nic-6e9afdf8-ccaf-42e8,bus=pci.0,addr=0xd,netdev=nic-6e9afdf8-ccaf-42e8,mac=aa:00:00:46:8f:08 -incoming tcp:172.29.182.13:8102 -qmp unix:/var/run/ganeti/kvm-hypervisor/ctrl/geo1.debian.org.qmp,server,nowait -qmp unix:/var/run/ganeti/kvm-hypervisor/ctrl/geo1.debian.org.kvmd,server,nowait -boot c -device virtio-blk-pci,id=disk-8a45befd-be45-4b75,bus=pci.0,addr=0xc,drive=disk-8a45befd-be45-4b75 -drive file=/var/run/ganeti/instance-disks/geo1.debian.org:0,format=raw,if=none,aio=threads,cache=none,discard=unmap,id=disk-8a45befd-be45-4b75,auto-read-only=off -runas ganeti04 It seems that buster guests on the same host are unaffected, with similar-looking command lines. The host's CPUs are Intel Xeon Silver 4110. Our other x86-64 clusters either use AMD CPUs (also with "-cpu host") or Xeon E5-2699 v3 CPUs, with "-cpu Haswell-noTSX". Regards, Adam
Re: linux image for 12.2?
On Tue, 2023-08-08 at 11:53 -0500, Matt Zagrabelny wrote: > Greetings Debian Release Team, > > Thank you for your service to Debian users, it is appreciated! > > Are there plans to update the linux kernel for the 12.2 point > release? > > I'm hitting a bug that is fixed (commit 3de4d22cc9ac7) in 6.1.43 and > am hoping that the next point release will include that kernel. > There's basically always a kernel update in every point release, but the specific version and any additional patches included is up to the kernel maintainers; adding the -kernel list to CC. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (11.7)
Hi, The next point release for "bullseye" (11.7) is scheduled for Saturday, April 29th. Processing of new uploads into bullseye-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (11.6)
Hi, The next point release for "bullseye" (11.6) is scheduled for Saturday, December 17th. Processing of new uploads into bullseye-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming oldstable point release (10.13)
Hi, The next - and final - point release for "buster" (10.13) is scheduled for Saturday, September 10th. Processing of new uploads into buster- proposed-updates will be frozen during the weekend of August 27th. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (11.5)
Hi, The next point release for "bullseye" (11.5) is scheduled for Saturday, September 10th. Processing of new uploads into bullseye-proposed- updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (11.4)
Hi, The next point release for "bullseye" (11.4) is scheduled for Saturday, July 9th. Processing of new uploads into bullseye-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming oldstable point release (10.12)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.12) is scheduled for Saturday, March 26th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (11.3)
Hi, The next point release for "bullseye" (11.3) is scheduled for Saturday, March 26th. Processing of new uploads into bullseye-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (11.2)
Hi, The next point release for "bullseye" (11.2) is scheduled for Saturday, December 18th. Processing of new uploads into bullseye-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (11.1)`
Hi, The first point release for "bullseye" (11.1) is scheduled for Saturday, October 9th. Processing of new uploads into bullseye- proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming oldstable point release (10.11)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.11) is scheduled for Saturday, October 9th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (10.10)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.10) is scheduled for Saturday June 19th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (10.9)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.9) is scheduled for Saturday March 27th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (10.8)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.8) is scheduled for Saturday February 6th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (10.7)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.7) is scheduled for Saturday December 5th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (10.6)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.6) is scheduled for Saturday September 26th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Re: Upcoming stable point release (10.5)
Hi, On Sun, 2020-07-12 at 15:37 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > On Sat, 2020-06-27 at 14:35 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > The next point release for "buster" (10.5) is scheduled for > > Saturday July 18th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed- > > updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. > > Unfortunately this has had to be delayed slightly. > > A new date will be announced soon. This will now be Saturday August 1st. Regards, Adam
Re: Upcoming stable point release (10.5)
Hi, On Sat, 2020-06-27 at 14:35 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > The next point release for "buster" (10.5) is scheduled for Saturday > July 18th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates > will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Unfortunately this has had to be delayed slightly. A new date will be announced soon. Regards, Adam
RFC: Clean-up of old kernel ABIs at point releases
[MFT and Reply-To set to debian-release, to try and avoid spamming too many people with the discussion] Hi, When the kernel ABI version has been increased between two point releases, we currently remove the old versions as part of the point release, to avoid carrying cruft. This has unfortunate side-effects for a number of use cases, including CI setups which immediately stop working as the packages they attempt to install no longer exist in the archive. If we were instead to change this policy to, for example, remove the packages after the subsequent point release instead, can anyone see any problems that this might cause, whether for tooling, tools or anything else? Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (10.5)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.5) is scheduled for Saturday July 18th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming oldstable point release (9.13)
Hi, The next - and final - point release for "stretch" (9.13) is scheduled for Saturday, July 18th. Processing of new uploads into stretch- proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (10.4)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.4) is scheduled for Saturday, May 9th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming oldstable point release (9.12)
Hi, The next point release for "stretch" (9.12) is scheduled for Saturday, February 8th. Processing of new uploads into stretch-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (10.3)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.3) is scheduled for Saturday, February 8th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (10.2)
Hi, The next point release for "buster" (10.2) is scheduled for Saturday, November 16th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
process-upload issue (was: Re: Bits from the Release Team: ride like the wind, Bullseye!)
[CC += ftpmaster]
On Mon, 2019-08-05 at 17:49 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2019-07-21 at 10:55 -0300, Ivo De Decker wrote:
> [...]
> > We are aware that src:linux is a special case here. I added an
> > exception for the arch:all binaries from src:linux. When the next
> > ABI bump in unstable happens, feel free to let me know, so that I
> > can check if it works as expected.
>
> I uploaded a new version (5.2.6-1) to unstable today (11:35 UTC), and
> the upload was acknowledged (11:40 UTC) but it hasn't yet showed up
> in the NEW queue.
That looks like a problem on the archive side. The dak log suggests an
issue logging an issue with a .changes file:
20190805181929|process-upload|dak|exception|Traceback (most recent call last):
20190805181929|process-upload|dak|exception| File "/usr/local/bin/dak", line
228, in main
20190805181929|process-upload|dak|exception|module.main()
20190805181929|process-upload|dak|exception| File
"/srv/ftp-master.debian.org/dak/dak/process_upload.py", line 591, in main
20190805181929|process-upload|dak|exception|process_changes(changes_files)
20190805181929|process-upload|dak|exception| File
"/srv/ftp-master.debian.org/dak/dak/process_upload.py", line 502, in
process_changes
20190805181929|process-upload|dak|exception|Logger.log([filename, "Error
while loading changes: {0}".format(e)])
20190805181929|process-upload|dak|exception|UnicodeEncodeError: 'ascii' codec
can't encode character u'\ufffd' in position 223: ordinal not in range(128)
Regards,
Adam
Upcoming oldstable point release (9.10)
Hi, The next point release for "stretch" (9.10) is scheduled for Saturday, September 7th. Processing of new uploads into stretch-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (10.1)
Hi, The first point release for "buster" (10.1) is scheduled for Saturday, September 7th. Processing of new uploads into buster-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (9.9)
Hi, The next point release for "stretch" (9.9) is scheduled for Saturday, April 27th. Processing of new uploads into stretch-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Re: Fixing stretch debian-installer on armhf
On Thu, 2019-03-07 at 22:01 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Thu, 2019-03-07 at 14:39 +0100, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > [...] > > > * Rebuild the debian-installer images, pulling in updates from > > > stretch-updates, leaving only armhf netboot targets broken. > > > > Expanding a bit: rebuilding src:debian-installer from the stretch > > branch, which has s-p-u enabled, would fetch the fixed kernel and a > > couple of its udebs, at build time; the resulting netboot images > > wouldn't know about s-p-u though at run time, and would try to load > > udebs from stretch. > > [...] > > Why is that a problem? The only change made in 4.9.144-3.1 is in the > kernel image, and the module udebs don't have versioned dependencies. However, as an additional data point, the kernel currently sat in NEW and destined for stable has an ABI bump. If that's accepted, then I assume things will "just work" in the meantime as the old binary packages will hang around until they're decrufted, but it's worth bearing in mind. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (9.8)
Hi, The next point release for "stretch" (9.8) is scheduled for Saturday, February 16th. Processing of new uploads into stretch-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (9.6)
Hi, The next point release for "stretch" (9.6) is scheduled for Saturday, November 10th. Processing of new uploads into stretch-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (9.5)
Hi, The next point release for "stretch" (9.5) is scheduled for Saturday, July 14th. Processing of new uploads into stretch-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Re: Scheduling 9.5
On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 18:00 +0200, Laura Arjona Reina wrote: > > El 12 de junio de 2018 13:44:52 CEST, "Adam D. Barratt" rratt.org.uk> escribió: [...] > > - July 7th > > This we (publicity) can, and prefer it. > > > - July 14th > > This, could be possible, but only one of us is available. After some discussion on IRC, we've decided to go with the 14th and look at making the press side more handleable for that date. Regards, Adam
Re: Scheduling 9.5
On Tue, 2018-06-12 at 12:44 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: [...] > Given all of the above, I think the sanest option is to concentrate > on getting 8.11 done and jessie off our radar and then get 9.5 > sorted. > > For suggested dates for 9.5, we know that June 30th is a no-go, > Debcamp starts on July 21st and then Debconf on the 28th. So that > leaves us with: > > - July 7th > - July 14th > > Are people available for either or both of those dates? The 7th is looking like the favourite so far (although would mean freezing next weekend), but we still need an ftp-master (N)ACK on either / both date. Adam
Re: Scheduling 9.5
On 2018-06-08 18:51, Adam D. Barratt wrote: [Cc += debian-kernel] On Sun, 2018-05-20 at 12:04 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: On 15037 March 1977, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: [...] We're past any of the above by now, and while looking through the to-do list for the final jessie point release, I noticed that we currently have some packages in opu with versions higher than stable. We can either accept the packages and put up with the situation for a short while, or do 9.5 before 8.11. In practical terms, that would likely mean both 9.5 and 8.11 on June 23rd, freezing both next weekend. How do people feel about that? After discussions on IRC, it appears unlikely that the currently WIP kernel update will be ready in sufficient time to be happy with it on all architectures. So the possible options are: - go ahead with freezing 9.5 this weekend, and hope the kernel's ready in time - go ahead with freezing 9.5 this weekend, and update the kernel via stable-updates later - just do 8.11 this weekend, accept the version skew and get 9.5 released as soon as we can To be entirely honest, I'm not that comfortable with announcing a freeze this close to the actual date. In terms of packages with version skew, we have: - packages from the security archive, where users upgrading should already have the jessie-security package installed in any case - intel-microcode, src:patch and clamav, where it looks like the jessie package should work on stretch without issues - tzdata, which is already available from stretch-updates. Given all of the above, I think the sanest option is to concentrate on getting 8.11 done and jessie off our radar and then get 9.5 sorted. For suggested dates for 9.5, we know that June 30th is a no-go, Debcamp starts on July 21st and then Debconf on the 28th. So that leaves us with: - July 7th - July 14th Are people available for either or both of those dates? Regards, Adam
Re: Scheduling 9.5
-kernel: any chance of a yes/no ASAP, please? On 2018-06-08 18:51, Adam D. Barratt wrote: [Cc += debian-kernel] On Sun, 2018-05-20 at 12:04 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: On 15037 March 1977, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > - May 26th (meaning freeze this coming weekend, which might be a > big > ask) No. > - Jun 2nd (which may require an unusual SRM) Possible. > - Jun 9th (getting quite a way out of cadence, but maybe that > can't be > helped) Possible. We're past any of the above by now, and while looking through the to-do list for the final jessie point release, I noticed that we currently have some packages in opu with versions higher than stable. We can either accept the packages and put up with the situation for a short while, or do 9.5 before 8.11. In practical terms, that would likely mean both 9.5 and 8.11 on June 23rd, freezing both next weekend. How do people feel about that? Unless we can get a definite answer r.e. the kernel very quickly, we might have to live with the version skew for a short while and arrange alternate dates for 9.5, which would then be in July (as the 30th won't work for either Sledge or I, at least), which would be well past our 2-month goal. Regards, Adam
Re: Scheduling 9.5
[Cc += debian-kernel] On Sun, 2018-05-20 at 12:04 +0200, Joerg Jaspert wrote: > On 15037 March 1977, Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: > > - May 26th (meaning freeze this coming weekend, which might be a > > big > > ask) > > No. > > > - Jun 2nd (which may require an unusual SRM) > > Possible. > > > - Jun 9th (getting quite a way out of cadence, but maybe that > > can't be > > helped) > > Possible. We're past any of the above by now, and while looking through the to-do list for the final jessie point release, I noticed that we currently have some packages in opu with versions higher than stable. We can either accept the packages and put up with the situation for a short while, or do 9.5 before 8.11. In practical terms, that would likely mean both 9.5 and 8.11 on June 23rd, freezing both next weekend. How do people feel about that? Cheers, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (9.4)
Hi, The next point release for "stretch" (9.4) is scheduled for Saturday, March 10th. Processing of new uploads into stretch-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming oldstable point release
Hi, The next point release for "jessie" (8.10) is scheduled for Saturday, December 9th. Processing of new uploads into jessie-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release
Hi, The next point release for "stretch" (9.3) is scheduled for Saturday, December 9th. Processing of new uploads into stretch-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (9.1)
Hi, The first point release for "stretch" (9.1) is scheduled for Saturday, July 22nd. Processing of new uploads into stretch-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming oldstable point release (8.9)
Hi, The next point release for "jessie" (8.9) is scheduled for Saturday, July 22nd. Processing of new uploads into jessie-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (8.8)
Hi, The next point release for "jessie" (8.8) is scheduled for Saturday, May 6th. Processing of new uploads into jessie-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (8.7)
Hi, The next point release for "jessie" (8.7) is scheduled for Saturday, January 14th. Processing of new uploads into jessie-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (8.6)
Hi, The next point release for "jessie" (8.6) is scheduled for Saturday, September 17th. Processing of new uploads into jessie-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Re: Fixing a regression in linux in 8.4
On Thu, 2016-04-07 at 02:04 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > Bug #819881 is affecting a fair number of users and I'm wondering how > best to get the fix deployed. I can upload to jessie-pu any time but > most users won't get it that way, and the next point release is just > too far away. I can also bundle it with a security update but there's > nothing that important (except on s390x) to push out soon. > > Could this fix (and some other reversions) go into jessie-updates? Under the circumstances, that sounds like a reasonable idea, yes. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (8.4)
Hi, The next point release for "jessie" (8.4) is scheduled for Saturday, April 2nd. Processing of new uploads into jessie-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Upcoming oldstable point release (7.10)
Hi, The next point release for "wheezy" (7.10) is scheduled for Saturday, April 2nd. Processing of new uploads into wheezy-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
Re: {old,}stable-pu uploads for linux
On 2016-03-07 16:34, Ben Hutchings wrote: We've discussed updates of linux for the next point releases and wheezy and jessie, and I finally made the uploads at the weekend. Are you expecting bug reports from me with a summary of changes, or is that enough? Just uploading is fine, thanks. The fact that they haven't been accepted yet is simply due to a lack of tuits, at least on my part. (I also need to find the tuits to confirm a date for the point releases, which at the rate things are going might be a few weeks time yet.) Regards, Adam
Bug#816500: linux-tools: should not migrate to testing before the corresponding src:linux
On 2016-03-02 17:22, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 17:21 +0100, Emilio Pozuelo Monfort wrote: On 02/03/16 13:24, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Wed, 2016-03-02 at 12:31 +0100, Andreas Beckmann wrote: > > Source: linux-tools > > Version: 4.4-4 > > Severity: important > > > > Hi, > > > > new major upstream releases (e.g. 4.4) of src:linux and src:linux-tools > > should migrate together to testing. Right now src:linux-tools 4.4-4 is > > already in testing, which doesn't look too useful to me without > > src:linux 4.4.x-y. > > This should have been prevented by the fact that it makes linux-perf > uninstallable in testing (it depends on linux-perf-4.3). Cc'ing the > release team to comment on why it happened anyway. Because linux-perf-4.3 is still in testing. Yet only on two architectures! Yes, because... It was smooth-updated. Not sure if that was expected, given the package is in section devel and not (old)libs. Actually, I'm not sure that it was. The excuses for the run during which it migrated has: old binaries left on href="http://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?arch=amd64=linux-tools=4.4-4; target="_blank">amd64: liblockdep4.3, linux-kbuild-4.3, linux-perf-4.3 (from href="http://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?arch=amd64=linux-tools=4.3.1-2; target="_blank">4.3.1-2) (but ignoring cruft, so nevermind) old binaries left on href="http://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?arch=i386=linux-tools=4.4-4; target="_blank">i386: liblockdep4.3, linux-kbuild-4.3, linux-perf-4.3 (from href="http://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?arch=i386=linux-tools=4.3.1-2; target="_blank">4.3.1-2) (but ignoring cruft, so nevermind) old binaries left on href="http://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?arch=arm64=linux-tools=4.4-4; target="_blank">arm64: liblockdep4.3, linux-kbuild-4.3, linux-perf-4.3 (from href="http://buildd.debian.org/status/logs.php?arch=arm64=linux-tools=4.3.1-2; target="_blank">4.3.1-2) (but ignoring cruft, so nevermind) and so on. So the new version was migrated at the start of the run, and then she tried to remove the cruft at the end (and is still trying, in fact). Does that mean there was manual intervention? Or is that automatic behaviour? Does it ignore all->any dependencies on !x86? It was all automatic. britney only requires that arch:all packages are installable on i386 and amd64. At the end of the britney run during which linux-tools migrated, the old binary packages from each of the other architectures were removed as doing so did not create any new uninstallability so far as britney was concerned. Regards, Adam
Upcoming stable point release (8.3)
Hi, The next point release for "jessie" (8.3) is scheduled for Saturday, January 23rd. Processing of new uploads into jessie-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam
3.2.71-1 / 3.16.7-ckt17-1
Hi,
Thanks for uploading new kernels to {,o-}p-u.
Unfortunately, the wheezy upload FTBFS on i386 with a bunch of ABI
changes.
Looking at the diffstat for the jessie upload, there are many new files
along the lines of:
debian/linux-headers-3.16.0-0.bpo.4-4kc-malta.postinst
| 26
debian/linux-headers-3.16.0-0.bpo.4-586.postinst
| 26
debian/linux-headers-3.16.0-0.bpo.4-5kc-malta.postinst
| 26
[...]
debian/linux-image-3.16.0-0.bpo.4-versatile.postinst
| 649 ++
debian/linux-image-3.16.0-0.bpo.4-versatile.postrm
| 265
debian/linux-image-3.16.0-0.bpo.4-versatile.preinst
| 119 +
debian/linux-image-3.16.0-0.bpo.4-versatile.prerm
| 158 ++
debian/linux-image-3.16.0-0.bpo.4-versatile.templates
| 53
Was that intentional?
Regards,
Adam
Upcoming stable point release (8.2)
Hi, The next point release for jessie (8.2) is scheduled for Saturday, September 5th. Processing of new uploads into jessie-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Upcoming oldstable point release (7.9)
Hi, The next point release for wheezy (7.9) is scheduled for Saturday, September 5th. Processing of new uploads into wheezy-proposed-updates will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Bug#780773: Please backport EDAC_IE31200 to Linux 3.16.x
On 2015-04-07 0:17, Ben Hutchings wrote: Bug #780773 requests backporting a new EDAC (Error Detection And Correction) driver that is wanted on some Intel-based servers. It seems to be simple to backport to 3.16, but I'm not sure whether it meets the release criteria. EDAC drivers are not needed for hardware enablement, but they are needed for logging of correctable ECC errors and detailed information about uncorrectable ECC errors, which is important for highly reliable systems. Please can I have an ack or nak from the release team? Assuming that this request is still current and wasn't just pre-release, this sounds like something I'd be happy to defer to your judgement on. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/e84071c0540b02a7902eb98c1e214...@mail.adam-barratt.org.uk
Upcoming stable point release (8.1)
Hi, The first point release for jessie (8.1) is scheduled for Saturday, June 6th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Upcoming stable point release (7.8)
Hi, The next point release for wheezy (7.8) is scheduled for Saturday, January 10th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Uploading linux (3.2.63-1)
On Sun, 2014-09-28 at 18:42 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 03:54 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
I intend to upload linux version 3.2.63-1 to stable-proposed-updates
later this week. This will include all the fixes that went into stable
updates 3.2.61-63 inclusive, including fixes for these security issues:
[...]
Flagged for acceptance in to p-u; thanks.
and built everywhere except s390{,x}, where it failed with an ABI
change.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
https://lists.debian.org/1412015358.25283.14.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Uploading linux (3.2.63-1)
On Mon, 2014-09-29 at 23:24 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
On Mon, 2014-09-29 at 19:29 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Sun, 2014-09-28 at 18:42 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote:
On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 03:54 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
I intend to upload linux version 3.2.63-1 to stable-proposed-updates
later this week. This will include all the fixes that went into stable
updates 3.2.61-63 inclusive, including fixes for these security issues:
[...]
Flagged for acceptance in to p-u; thanks.
and built everywhere except s390{,x}, where it failed with an ABI
change.
We can ignore that change, but I forgot to do that. (We had the same
build failure in 3.14.10-1.)
I've flagged 3.2.63-2, including the fix, for acceptance; thanks for the
quick turn-around.
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
https://lists.debian.org/1412055407.25283.19.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Uploading linux (3.2.63-1)
On Wed, 2014-09-24 at 03:54 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: I intend to upload linux version 3.2.63-1 to stable-proposed-updates later this week. This will include all the fixes that went into stable updates 3.2.61-63 inclusive, including fixes for these security issues: [...] Flagged for acceptance in to p-u; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1411926130.25283.10.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming stable point release (7.7)
Hi, The next point release for wheezy (7.7) is scheduled for Saturday, October 18th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1411585956.15708.2.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Uploading linux (3.2.60-1)
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. 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. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1404928789.1894.6.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
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 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1404930921.1894.9.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming stable point release (7.6)
Hi, The next point release for wheezy (7.6) is scheduled for Saturday, July 12th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1402513678.4620.13.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming oldstable point release (6.0.10)
Hi, The next (and final) point release for squeeze (6.0.10) is scheduled for Saturday, July 19th. Oldstable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1402513777.4620.15.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming stable point release (7.5)
Hi, The next point release for wheezy (7.5) is scheduled for Saturday, April 26th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1395609622.12119.11.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming stable point release (7.4)
Hi, The next point release for wheezy (7.4) is scheduled for Saturday February 8th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1390507736.6444.23.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming oldstable point release (6.0.9)
Hi, The next point release for squeeze (6.0.9) is scheduled for Saturday February 15th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1390507759.6444.24.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Uploading linux (3.2.53-2)
On 2013-12-17 5:49, Ben Hutchings wrote: I screwed up the fix for CVE-2013-2929 in linux 3.2.53-1, making things worse *and* breaking legitimate apps (chromium). Please accept 3.2.53-2 into stable-proposed-updates (when it arrives - it will take another few minutes). Flagged for acceptance; thanks. (Unfortunately slightly too late for the current dinstall to pick it up.) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/14b5978ecc827d7a81fd1970f7fd7...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Upcoming stable point release (7.3)
Hi, The next point release for wheezy (7.3) is scheduled for Saturday December 14th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1386102648.3844.14.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming stable point release (7.2)
Hi, The next point release for wheezy (7.2) is scheduled for Saturday October 12th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1379877070.4765.26.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming oldstable point release (6.0.8)
Hi, The next point release for squeeze (6.0.8) is scheduled for Saturday October 19th. Oldstable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1379877103.4765.27.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Next (old)stable point releases
On Mon, 2013-08-19 at 14:59 +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 03:55:14PM +0200, Julien Cristau wrote: we should start thinking about dates for the 7.2 and 6.0.8 point releases. Which week-ends in the coming months would work for ftpmaster, press and cd? (We'd need one date for stable and another later for oldstable.) Apologies for the delay from my side. [...] - Sep 7-8 That's obviously too close now. - Sep 28-29 I'm at a family event on that Saturday; it would be doable if someone else is available though. - Oct 12-13 - Oct 19-20 Either of those is fine for me. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1378246184.28836.91.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Next (old)stable point releases
On Mon, 2013-09-02 at 18:35 +0200, Joey Schulze wrote: Jonathan Wiltshire wrote: [I don't appear to have Jonathan's mail - and nor do the list archives - so piggy-backing on Joey's.] We're much longer overdue for oldstable (February) than we are for stable (June); if we stagger them, should we consider oldstable first? It would quite probably be easier to do stable first, despite the above. We have a few packages in both p-u and o-p-u currently which are newer upstream versions (mostly via security), such that p-u o-p-u stable oldstable. If the oldstable point release occurs first, we either have to not include those packages until 6.0.9 or temporarily have oldstable stable, which is at best confusing. (We've been in the latter situation previously, for 5.0.9 / 6.0.3, and after some debate on the day decided to include the packages in any case; I'm not sure we should take that as precedent, however.) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1378161699.18562.14.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Updating Linux in wheezy
On Fri, 2013-06-07 at 03:26 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: I realise there's now just a week before the point release, which doesn't leave much time for updating the installer even if I upload right now (which I'm not about to). Sorry for letting this slide. Supposing I can upload on Saturday, could that new package get into the installer, or at least into the point release? It's tight, but Saturday would be within the window we announced so should okay from that perspective; it could be interesting if any regressions appear. As wheezy's linux package also produces the kernel udebs, we should really have the kernel included in the point release be the same as the kernel that the installer's built with. CCing Cyril and -boot for any comments on that side. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1370580963.15198.28.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: getting allwinner SoC support upstream (was Re: Uploading linux (3.9.4-1))
[non-debian lists dropped] On Wed, 2013-06-05 at 20:46 +0100, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote: what's the point of mentioning this? well, the point is: the expectation of the linux kernel developers is that Everyone Must Convert To DeviceTree. [...] thoughts and discussion appreciated. Somewhere other than debian-release, please. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1370462863.5745.6.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Upcoming stable point release (7.1)
Hi, The first point release for wheezy (7.1) is scheduled for Saturday June 15th. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding weekend. As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1368681625.6290.20.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Auto-loading lxfb on OLPC XO systems
On 2013-04-29 9:17, Cyril Brulebois wrote: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk (29/04/2013): I've uploaded and opened an unblock bug (#706367). I didn't remember to set urgency=high, so please overide that. Do I need to do anything more? Just needs a release guy to let it through. :) A slightly larger patch than I anticipated, but the changes look sane anyway; RT: please unblock/unblock-udeb/unblock-udev/urgent. Done. o O ( unblock-udev ) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/13aec6cb32daed3146316874c7736...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Bug#697619: Processed: found 697619 in 0.110
On Mon, 2013-04-22 at 21:36 +, Debian Bug Tracking System wrote:
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
found 697619 0.110
Bug #697619 {Done: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk} [initramfs-tools]
Many HID drivers not included in initramfs
Marked as found in versions initramfs-tools/0.110 and reopened.
What's the issue with the fix? If we need another upload for i-t for r0
then it'll need to be soon. :-|
Regards,
Adam
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/1366747406.24885.9.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#697619: Processed: found 697619 in 0.110
On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 22:17 +0200, Michael Prokop wrote: * Adam D. Barratt [Tue Apr 23, 2013 at 09:03:26PM +0100]: What's the issue with the fix? If we need another upload for i-t for r0 then it'll need to be soon. :-| We've 0.109.1 which fixes that in wheezy and unstable, shouldn't this be enough? Is experimental's 0.110 of i-t an issue WRT to r0? I'd push a 0.111 release to experimental immediately then. Bah, I misread the versions and thought it was affecting the recent upload to sid; sorry for the noise. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1366748404.24885.16.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Bug#697619: Processed: found 697619 in 0.110
On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 21:23 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 09:03:26PM +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: What's the issue with the fix? If we need another upload for i-t for r0 then it'll need to be soon. :-| The fix hasn't gone into a 'mainline' release yet, so this still affects experimental. Yeah, I should have checked the version more closely... *sigh* Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1366748643.24885.17.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Auto-loading lxfb on OLPC XO systems
On Sat, 2013-04-20 at 03:28 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: [x86 XO systems need a framebuffer driver which udev blacklists] This will result in a regression when upgrading one of these systems from squeeze. (Although I don't think Debian kernel images have ever had complete support for them.) I've opened bug #705784 for this against udev, and Marco has said he's willing for me to NMU it. Alternately, in the kernel, I can revert the change to a module, or rename the module to evade the blacklist, but neither of those is particularly nice. But I think any kernel changes now are going to be too disruptive to the installer. A udev change might still be considered too disruptive in any case; CCing Cyril to see if he has any strong opinions. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1366463898.23177.17.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Firmware versions for Intel Wireless 6005/6205
On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 04:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: (a) Update firmware-iwlwifi to include the new firmware. Slightly risky as our users haven't been testing it. (b Change the driver to request firmware ABI 5 then 4. Trivial code change, and only has a negative effect for users that installed firmware-iwlwifi from experimental. (c) Change the driver to request firmware ABI 5, then 6, then 4. Bigger code change; allows people to use the new firmware if they want it but not if they install the firmware-iwlwifi package (as that will have both ABI 5 and ABI 6 until post-jessie). I think (b) looks like the only viable option. Is this a significant enough issue to not consider (at least) one of (d) Postponing the fix to r1 (e) Documenting the issue ? Presumably (b) implies a new kernel upload and therefore d-i respin? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1366464264.23177.21.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: Firmware versions for Intel Wireless 6005/6205
On Sat, 2013-04-20 at 14:33 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Sat, 2013-04-20 at 14:24 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Thu, 2013-04-18 at 04:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: (b Change the driver to request firmware ABI 5 then 4. Trivial code change, and only has a negative effect for users that installed firmware-iwlwifi from experimental. [...] Is this a significant enough issue to not consider (at least) one of (d) Postponing the fix to r1 (e) Documenting the issue [...] Presumably (b) implies a new kernel upload and therefore d-i respin? Yes. I've made the change in svn, but I'm happy to release-note this for r0. Thanks. Avoiding a respin at this stage would definitely be preferable. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1366465206.23177.25.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: 6.0.7 planning
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 15:36 -0800, dann frazier wrote: Agreed; and I think I was unclear. I was taking for granted that we *will* do a 46squeeze2 now w/ the CVE-2013-0871 fix and bypass 46squeeze1. 46squeeze2 would provide the security-only option. The question was whether or not we should try and fix p-u by getting a -49 into -stable now w/ the CVE-2013-0871 fix, or just make sure there's a 48squeeze1 in security for after. Ah - but maybe the point you're making is that a 48squeeze1 in security would make 46squeeze2 harder to find/install - if so, I can understand that point. What's the current thinking here? Given the timescales, if we are looking at a -49 in p-u to form part of the point release, I think it needs to be uploaded (and accepted) today, and the earlier the better. Depending on which buildd picks the package up (which we can't control) both the armel and mipsel builds have history of taking around a day (30 hours for some mipsel builds) to complete and when delays due to waiting for dinstall, an available buildd, glitches in the matrix, etc. are taken in to account, we're getting rather tight. :-( Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1361344668.20180.8.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: 6.0.7 planning
On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 11:32 +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 01:41 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 10:28 -0800, dann frazier wrote: Security update has been uploaded. I'll post the builds somewhere as they become available for anyone interested in testing. Version 2.6.32-48 has also been uploaded. Flagged for acceptance; thanks. All the builds are now in, so we should be ready for lkdi updates when convenient. I gather there's a chance there might need to be further security updates; will that mean we need another update in p-u? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1361114044.20472.76.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: 6.0.7 planning
On Sun, 2013-02-17 at 13:33 -0800, dann frazier wrote: On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 03:14:04PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: I gather there's a chance there might need to be further security updates; will that mean we need another update in p-u? Possibly; an alternative would be to release a 48squeeze1 via security to sync up w/ the fixes just before the point release. That would let us go ahead and get the lkdi/d-i updates ready and give us some flexibility to react to any follow-on changes that may appear this week as CVE-2013-0871 is discussed. From the release perspective, I obviously have a bias toward wanting to get a finalised kernel and lkdi / d-i sorted sooner rather than later, both so we can get people to test the former and to reduce the likelihood of last minute issues / upload chasing with the latter. On the other hand, I know Ben has another fix queued for stable, and I saw a mention of a possible s390/KVM regression - so those may justify the extra p-u update. Are these regressions from the current stable kernel? Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1361140954.20472.122.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: 6.0.7 planning
On Fri, 2013-02-15 at 01:41 +, Ben Hutchings wrote: On Thu, 2013-02-14 at 10:28 -0800, dann frazier wrote: Security update has been uploaded. I'll post the builds somewhere as they become available for anyone interested in testing. Version 2.6.32-48 has also been uploaded. Flagged for acceptance; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1360927955.20472.8.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: 6.0.7 planning
On 12.02.2013 02:15, Ben Hutchings wrote: One or other of us will then need to merge the squeeze-security branch into squeeze and upload -48 in time for the point release. Is there an ETA for that? Sorry for chasing, but if we're going to go for the 23rd (which is looking likely atm) we'd be looking at closing p-u-NEW over the weekend and could really do with announcing that asap. (So it'll be uploaded to p-u-NEW over the weekend should be fine, as we can then plan around that.) Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/bbb3e46ad36b298be8c82cca0b02a...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
Upcoming stable point release (6.0.7)
Hi, The next point release for squeeze (6.0.7) is scheduled for Saturday February 23rd. Stable NEW will be frozen during the preceding Monday (18th). As usual, base-files can be uploaded at any point before the freeze. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1360783944.9953.3.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
Re: 6.0.7 planning
On 12.02.2013 13:08, Philipp Kern wrote: On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 04:25:38PM +, Adam D. Barratt wrote: We're somewhat overdue with the next Squeeze point release (6.0.7) and it'd be good to get it done before the wheezy release, so that we can pull in some upgrade fixes. As an opening gambit, some proposed dates, all of which appear to currently work for me: February 23rd March 2nd March 9th These all work for me. I will be sort of offline, however, from February 14th to (including) 17th, which looks like the preparation range for the first date. I think we've heard from everyone now, with there being a preference for the 23rd from the CD perspective. That means we'd be looking at closing p-u over the upcoming weekend, i.e. the 16 / 17th. That should be doable, if a little tighter than I'd normally like, assuming we can get the kernel upload done / accepted in time, to avoid last minute panic over lkdi / d-i builds; CCing -kernel for opinions. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/433f65e1164f2af26d2c5d7e94856...@mail.adsl.funky-badger.org
6.0.7 planning
Hi, We're somewhat overdue with the next Squeeze point release (6.0.7) and it'd be good to get it done before the wheezy release, so that we can pull in some upgrade fixes. As an opening gambit, some proposed dates, all of which appear to currently work for me: February 23rd March 2nd March 9th Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1360513538.7444.29.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org
