From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 23363 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2004 22:00:27 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 9 Jul 2004 22:00:27 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bj3Pu-0006Lb-CE for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 09 Jul 2004 22:00:26 +0000 Received: (qmail 12679 invoked by uid 89); 9 Jul 2004 22:00:25 +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 28144 invoked from network); 9 Jul 2004 22:00:25 +0000 Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 14:58:32 -0700 From: Greg KH To: Gentoo Dev Mailing List Message-ID: <20040709215832.GA6155@kroah.com> References: <20040709212736.GA5669@kroah.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] kernel team: please make up your mind X-Archives-Salt: fbae4ff9-67b3-4887-a96e-d45ee3baf9e9 X-Archives-Hash: 1829e644162fa3872618d78bd049df09 On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 03:50:19PM -0600, Jason Wever wrote: > On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Greg KH wrote: > > > On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 03:15:05PM -0600, Jason Wever wrote: > > > Can we please get a consistent answer on 2.6 kernels when it comes to > > > sparc? We used to have sparc-development-sources, which we were told to > > > consolidate into development-sources. Now today with absolutely 0 > > > notification what-so-ever, our patchsets to development-sources were > > > yanked because it wasn't the appropriate place. > > > > Sorry for the stress. There really isn't a kernel team anymore, becides > > me and a few others, and we all seem strung accross different timezones > > these days. > > That's about the size of most of our teams. What was so dire about the > sparc patch to development-sources that it had to be removed right this > instant without consulting both SPARC and your own kernel team? There was a bug marked for this. Sorry for being quick on it. I was also told a while ago that the sparc team had their own kernel. I never thought it was this one (as the metadata file sure didn't say that...) > > Here's the answer: > > - development-sources are clean kernel.org kernels > > - gentoo-dev-sources are the current 2.6 kernel trees for all > > arches. There is no cesspool of patches in there, and it is > > the kernel for the ppc64, amd64, x86, and a few other arches. > > Making it the sparc kernel too is no big deal. > > > > This is needed so that bugs and security fixes that previously have not > > gotten put into the d-s package get applied across all arches quickly > > and easily. > > > > I am willing and able to help the sparc team (and any other arch) to > > make the g-d-s package work for them. > > > > Is that acceptable? > > Yes and no. I'm definitely willing to help work with you to get that > patch set in there. However that doesn't change the fact that the > adjustment of the packages today was very bad as it wasn't communicated at > all to allow us to at least notify our users that things will change. > Removing our patchset can and will cause problems for people who were > using development-sources on sparc, and more than just because they have > to switch what kernel they use. But they get security fixes for free with that switch, that's a good reason to do so :) > If you want to make changes that's fine, just please consider the > ramifications of those changes and let the people who will be effected > know with enough time before-hand so that they can do what is needed to > help make those migration changes as smooth as possible. Again, sorry for the speed at which this happened, I am very sorry about it. thanks, greg k-h -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list