From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10140 invoked by uid 1002); 24 Jul 2003 13:38:27 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 32718 invoked from network); 24 Jul 2003 13:38:27 -0000 From: Paul de Vrieze To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Date: Thu, 24 Jul 2003 15:38:23 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2 References: <20030723121603.11ab807e.frogger@gentoo.org> <20030724090711.GH30147%chutz@gg3.net> <20030724090706.37242e13.frogger@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20030724090706.37242e13.frogger@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Boundary-02=_QF+H/0v/HEiRmbU"; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200307241538.24351.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-5.1 required=5.0 X-Spam-Level: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-milter (http://amavis.org/) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Where to put prerelease vanilla kernels? X-Archives-Salt: 18d7efa6-3359-4c04-9e3f-b4873bed1447 X-Archives-Hash: 6dfcb0859255f014f21c37d51c4ba1fb --Boundary-02=_QF+H/0v/HEiRmbU Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Description: signed data Content-Disposition: inline On Thursday 24 July 2003 15:07, Matt Rickard wrote: > > I fully support the opinions stated above, and I simply cannot > > comprehend what the big deal with ~arch masking vanilla-sources is. > > Even *considering* the option of a separate package is ridiculous. As > > long as developers are careful enough to not remove the ~arch mask > > from any _pre kernel, I am perfectly fine, and I believe there > > wouldn't be anyone who isn't fine. What are we trying to do-- make > > sure people who insist on running the *unstable* profile actually > > don't get the "unstable" sources. > > Well the fact is that an unstable kernel can be a whole lot more > problematic than an unstable userland package. With userland, if it > crashes, oh well, you can start it up again. With an unstable kernel > you run the risk of hard locks and corrupted filesystems. As far as I know we don't actually compile any kernel automatically. That=20 means that it still requires user action to actually install a prekernel.=20 That means that a user must actually decide on running a prekernel Paul =2D-=20 Paul de Vrieze Researcher Mail: pauldv@cs.kun.nl Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net --Boundary-02=_QF+H/0v/HEiRmbU Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA/H+FQbKx5DBjWFdsRAvkDAKDGv0WVgxzDTi0500BO7IqiPO/xEwCeI2eC YImNdbrYcRtHe2rxefiK/mU= =BOKS -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Boundary-02=_QF+H/0v/HEiRmbU--