Re: [gentoo-dev] kernel team: please make up your mind

[Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org>]

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:32:38PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Jul 2004 14:27:36 -0700 Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> | 	- development-sources are clean kernel.org kernels
> 
> Since when? This is not what we were told when John helped us to move
> our sparc patchset from sparc-dev-sources to his shiny new kernel-2
> powered development-sources. We were given lengthy assurances that we
> would a) be able to keep our sparc patchset there without having to
> worry about it b) conflicting with the horridly broken gentoo- patchset
> and c) it being repeatedly broken by people doing "security bumps".
> 
> We already know that c) hasn't been happening, and our requests for
> certain people to show more care when dealing with other archs have
> fallen upon deaf ears. Now we're being told that a) and b) are no longer
> any good either?

Ok, sorry about this.  John went away for a long period of time, and I
took over the kernel stuff for him.  I never was aware of this issue,
and by reading the metadata file, I thought this was the case (also see
the point about the vanilla kernel.)

So, after the sparc patches get moved into the g-d-s package, this
package will be a clean kernel.org kernel only.  Is that ok with you?

> | 	- 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.
> 
> Of course it's a big deal. We've already made our users change kernel
> sets once. Now we're going to have to go through all this again because
> the kernel team don't talk to each other? And you also expect us to deal
> with people who assume that anything labeled gentoo-dev-sources will
> include the gentoo- patchset?

Sent those people to me.  I'm more than willing to fix that incorrect
assumption :)

> To be honest, given the history on this, I think the ideal solution for
> this would be an arch-dev-sources which was locked in cvs so that
> over-zealous x86-kernel and security people *couldn't* go and break our
> kernels *yet again*.

If you want to have a sparc-*-sources tree, fine with me.  I'll never
touch it (even for security fixes and other good stuff that you could
get for free by using the g-d-s package...)

That's your call.  I'm offering to help put sparc stuff into g-d-s.  If
the sparc people don't want to do that for whatever reason, I'm also ok
with that, as long as they don't use the d-s kernel package either.

Fair enough?

thanks,

greg k-h

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list