Re: [Fwd: Latest kernel stable/longterm status]
Ben Hutchings wrote: On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 08:24:08PM +0100, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk schrieb: --=-GV+LLjr9UIrWlGGcGT1j Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We need to make a decision soon on whether we will use Linux 3.2 for wheezy or wait for a later release. Whichever one we choose, we need to make sure someone (possibly one of us) maintains a longterm branch for it. I am strongly disinclined to choose a version that puts us on our own, and therefore I would prefer to use Linux 3.2 along with Ubuntu. What's Ubuntu's policy on backporting drivers? Not sure. Can you investigate that? If it's a common tree for Ubuntu and Debian we could keep stable bugfixes plus drivers backports in a common tree instead of the model in Squeeze, where backported drivers were added on top of 2.6.32. That might also be worth doing. Let's add Tim Gardner to CC, he mentioned maintaining a 3.2 on linux-kernel. Cheers, Moritz -- 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/20120120182746.GA31276@pisco.westfalen.local
Re: [Fwd: Latest kernel stable/longterm status]
Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk schrieb: --=-GV+LLjr9UIrWlGGcGT1j Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We need to make a decision soon on whether we will use Linux 3.2 for wheezy or wait for a later release. Whichever one we choose, we need to make sure someone (possibly one of us) maintains a longterm branch for it. I am strongly disinclined to choose a version that puts us on our own, and therefore I would prefer to use Linux 3.2 along with Ubuntu. What's Ubuntu's policy on backporting drivers? If it's a common tree for Ubuntu and Debian we could keep stable bugfixes plus drivers backports in a common tree instead of the model in Squeeze, where backported drivers were added on top of 2.6.32. Cheers, Moritz -- 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/slrnjhbimo.iir@inutil.org
Re: [Fwd: Latest kernel stable/longterm status]
On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 08:24:08PM +0100, Moritz Mühlenhoff wrote: Ben Hutchings b...@decadent.org.uk schrieb: --=-GV+LLjr9UIrWlGGcGT1j Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We need to make a decision soon on whether we will use Linux 3.2 for wheezy or wait for a later release. Whichever one we choose, we need to make sure someone (possibly one of us) maintains a longterm branch for it. I am strongly disinclined to choose a version that puts us on our own, and therefore I would prefer to use Linux 3.2 along with Ubuntu. What's Ubuntu's policy on backporting drivers? Not sure. Can you investigate that? If it's a common tree for Ubuntu and Debian we could keep stable bugfixes plus drivers backports in a common tree instead of the model in Squeeze, where backported drivers were added on top of 2.6.32. That might also be worth doing. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking. - Albert Camus -- 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/20120117213019.ga12...@decadent.org.uk
Re: [Fwd: Latest kernel stable/longterm status]
Hi, I'm just an end-user but personally I would prefer to see Wheezy release with a more recent kernel than 3.2. If Wheezy freezes in June linux 3.4 might already be released. When Wheezy releases there will be a 3.5 and likely even a 3.6. Having a more recent kernel (like 3.4) will result in having support for a lot more recent hardware, and possibly more features. Some of the later fixes might also be easier to backport to a more recent kernel. But I have absolutely no experience in maintaining a distribution kernel and have no idea on what requires the most work (doing stable updates or backporting drivers), so I could be wrong. Regards. Rik -- 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/4f0f5125.1060...@gmail.com
Re: [Fwd: Latest kernel stable/longterm status]
On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 22:00:47 +0100, Carlos Alberto Lopez Perez wrote: So my humble opinion, as user, is that 3.2 seems the best choice. Also, it is a newer kernel than 3.0, and this generally means more features and better support for newer devices. 3.0 was never an option AIUI. The choice is essentially between 3.2, 3.3 or 3.4. Cheers, Julien signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [Fwd: Latest kernel stable/longterm status]
Am 10.01.2012 02:42, schrieb Ben Hutchings: We need to make a decision soon on whether we will use Linux 3.2 for wheezy or wait for a later release. Whichever one we choose, we need to make sure someone (possibly one of us) maintains a longterm branch for it. I am strongly disinclined to choose a version that puts us on our own, and therefore I would prefer to use Linux 3.2 along with Ubuntu. Hi, I'm just a user, but using 3.2 along with Ubuntu LTS looks more than reasonable to me. Unfortunatly, upstream maintains only 3.0. Is there any longterm version beyond 3.0 in sight, which might be an adequate alternative for Wheezy? If not, the sum of Debian/UbuntuLTS installations should have a critical mass to justify the maintenance of a 3.2-DEBline on their own without offcial support from upstream. Regards, Marcus Forwarded Message From: Greg KHg...@kroah.com To: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org Subject: Latest kernel stable/longterm status Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 16:37:05 -0800 As 3.2 is now out, here's a note as to the current status of the different stable/longterm kernel trees. First off, please everyone remember to mark any patch that you want to have applied to the stable kernel trees with a simple: Cc: stablesta...@vger.kernel.org marking in the Signed-off-by: area. Once the patch hits Linus's tree, I will automatically be notified of it and it will be applied if possible. If it does not applied, you will be notified of that. Note that the address is sta...@vger.kernel.org, not the older address that used to be used before October of 2011. At this time, all stable and longterm kernel trees are being maintained in one big git tree, located at: git.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git There are different branches for every different major kernel version. Here's the different active kernel versions that I am maintaining at the moment: 3.2.y - this will be maintained until 3.3 comes out 3.1.y - there will be only one, maybe two, more releases of this tree 3.0.y - this is the new longterm kernel release, it will be maintained for 2 years at the minimum by me. 2.6.32.y - this is the previous longterm kernel release. It is approaching it's end-of-life, and I think I only have another month or so doing releases of this. After I am finished with it, it might be picked up by someone else, but I'm not going to promise anything. All other longterm kernels are being maintained in various forms (usually quite sporadically, if at all), by other people, and I can not speak for their lifetime at all, that is up to those individuals. If anyone has any questions about any of this, please let me know. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe stable in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- 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/4f0cbfb2.20...@googlemail.com
Re: [Fwd: Latest kernel stable/longterm status]
On Tue, Jan 10, 2012 at 11:46:10PM +0100, Marcus Osdoba wrote: Am 10.01.2012 02:42, schrieb Ben Hutchings: We need to make a decision soon on whether we will use Linux 3.2 for wheezy or wait for a later release. Whichever one we choose, we need to make sure someone (possibly one of us) maintains a longterm branch for it. I am strongly disinclined to choose a version that puts us on our own, and therefore I would prefer to use Linux 3.2 along with Ubuntu. Hi, I'm just a user, but using 3.2 along with Ubuntu LTS looks more than reasonable to me. Unfortunatly, upstream maintains only 3.0. Is there any longterm version beyond 3.0 in sight, which might be an adequate alternative for Wheezy? If not, the sum of Debian/UbuntuLTS installations should have a critical mass to justify the maintenance of a 3.2-DEBline on their own without offcial support from upstream. [...] There is no restriction that only Greg K-H can maintain longterm series; in fact he will be handing over 2.6.32 shortly. And 'upstream' isn't an exclusive club; many kernel team members in both distributions are upstream developers too. Whatever mainline version we start with, I will try to make sure that there is a longterm series based on it. If necessary, I will volunteer to do that myself, but I would rather find some other mug to do it! Ben. -- Ben Hutchings We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking. - Albert Camus -- 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/20120110233304.gv20...@decadent.org.uk
[Fwd: Latest kernel stable/longterm status]
We need to make a decision soon on whether we will use Linux 3.2 for wheezy or wait for a later release. Whichever one we choose, we need to make sure someone (possibly one of us) maintains a longterm branch for it. I am strongly disinclined to choose a version that puts us on our own, and therefore I would prefer to use Linux 3.2 along with Ubuntu. Ben. Forwarded Message From: Greg KH g...@kroah.com To: linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org Cc: sta...@vger.kernel.org Subject: Latest kernel stable/longterm status Date: Mon, 9 Jan 2012 16:37:05 -0800 As 3.2 is now out, here's a note as to the current status of the different stable/longterm kernel trees. First off, please everyone remember to mark any patch that you want to have applied to the stable kernel trees with a simple: Cc: stable sta...@vger.kernel.org marking in the Signed-off-by: area. Once the patch hits Linus's tree, I will automatically be notified of it and it will be applied if possible. If it does not applied, you will be notified of that. Note that the address is sta...@vger.kernel.org, not the older address that used to be used before October of 2011. At this time, all stable and longterm kernel trees are being maintained in one big git tree, located at: git.kernel.org:/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git There are different branches for every different major kernel version. Here's the different active kernel versions that I am maintaining at the moment: 3.2.y - this will be maintained until 3.3 comes out 3.1.y - there will be only one, maybe two, more releases of this tree 3.0.y - this is the new longterm kernel release, it will be maintained for 2 years at the minimum by me. 2.6.32.y - this is the previous longterm kernel release. It is approaching it's end-of-life, and I think I only have another month or so doing releases of this. After I am finished with it, it might be picked up by someone else, but I'm not going to promise anything. All other longterm kernels are being maintained in various forms (usually quite sporadically, if at all), by other people, and I can not speak for their lifetime at all, that is up to those individuals. If anyone has any questions about any of this, please let me know. thanks, greg k-h -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe stable in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html -- Ben Hutchings Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans. - John Lennon signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
