[gentoo-kernel] [ANNOUNCE] genpatches-2.6.16-2 release

[gentoo-kernel] [ANNOUNCE] genpatches-2.6.16-2 release

[Daniel Drake]

This is an automated email announcing the release of genpatches-2.6.16-2


CHANGES SINCE 2.6.16-1
-----------------------

Revision 341: 
Use sparsemem for ultrasparc machines, thanks to Gustavo Zacarias (dsd)
Added: 1710_sparc-sparsemem.patch

Revision 343: 
sky2 update, hopefully solves stability issues (dsd)
Added: 2400_sky2-1.1.patch

Revision 344: 
skge update, hopefully solves performance issues (dsd)
Added: 2405_skge-1.5.patch

Revision 345: 
input.h header fix for splashutils compile (dsd)
Added: 2600_input-h-bits-per-long.patch

Revision 346: 
Fix disconnect when renewing keys with hostap driver (dsd)
Added: 2410_hostap-eapol-encryption.patch

Revision 347: 
Linux 2.6.16.1 thanks to Francisco Lloret in bug #127838 (dsd)
Added: 1000_linux-2.6.16.1.patch

Revision 348: 
2.6.16-2 release (dsd)


PATCHES
-------

When the website updates, the complete patch list and split-out patches will be
available here:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~dsd/genpatches/patches-2.6.16-2.htm
http://dev.gentoo.org/~dsd/genpatches/tarballs/genpatches-2.6.16-2.base.tar.bz2
http://dev.gentoo.org/~dsd/genpatches/tarballs/genpatches-2.6.16-2.extras.tar.bz2


ABOUT GENPATCHES
----------------

genpatches is the patchset applied to some kernels available in Portage.

For more information, see the genpatches homepage:
http://dev.gentoo.org/~dsd/genpatches

For a simple example of how to use genpatches in your kernel ebuild, look at a
recent gentoo-sources-2.6.* ebuild.
-- 
gentoo-kernel@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-kernel] [ANNOUNCE] genpatches-2.6.16-2 release

[John Mylchreest]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 727 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 02:19:22PM +0100, Daniel Drake  <dsd@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Revision 347: 
> Linux 2.6.16.1 thanks to Francisco Lloret in bug #127838 (dsd)
> Added: 1000_linux-2.6.16.1.patch

Since were bunlding these whole now, should we just start naming the
ebuilds correctly instead?

gentoo-sources-2.6.16.1.ebuild perhaps in this case?
At least that way it will save a marginally amount on downloaded data,
we can revision bump stable releases and we can also tie in better with
portage versioning.

-- 
Role:            Gentoo Linux Kernel Lead
Gentoo Linux:    http://www.gentoo.org
Public Key:      gpg --recv-keys 9C745515
Key fingerprint: A0AF F3C8 D699 A05A EC5C  24F7 95AA 241D 9C74 5515


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-kernel] [ANNOUNCE] genpatches-2.6.16-2 release

[Daniel Drake]

John Mylchreest wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 02:19:22PM +0100, Daniel Drake  <dsd@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Revision 347: 
>> Linux 2.6.16.1 thanks to Francisco Lloret in bug #127838 (dsd)
>> Added: 1000_linux-2.6.16.1.patch
> 
> Since were bunlding these whole now, should we just start naming the
> ebuilds correctly instead?

I don't think so. 2 -stable releases in the 2.6.15 cycle didn't have any 
immediate corresponding gentoo-sources bump since the patches were 
already included. The fact that we include patches alongside -stable 
means that using their notation isn't entirely accurate in our situation.

Daniel

-- 
gentoo-kernel@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-kernel] [ANNOUNCE] genpatches-2.6.16-2 release

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 899 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 05:48:13PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> John Mylchreest wrote:
> >Since were bunlding these whole now, should we just start naming the
> >ebuilds correctly instead?
> 
> I don't think so. 2 -stable releases in the 2.6.15 cycle didn't have any 
> immediate corresponding gentoo-sources bump since the patches were 
> already included. The fact that we include patches alongside -stable 
> means that using their notation isn't entirely accurate in our situation.

Both naming schemes have their advantages, but I see more
disadvantages with using the 2.6.x.y naming scheme in gentoo-sources
than I see advantages (primarily the reason Daniel stated above).

I suggest we keep the current naming scheme for gentoo-sources, as it
seems most correct.

Regards,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 213 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-kernel] [ANNOUNCE] genpatches-2.6.16-2 release

[Kumba]

Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 05:48:13PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
>> John Mylchreest wrote:
>>> Since were bunlding these whole now, should we just start naming the
>>> ebuilds correctly instead?
>> I don't think so. 2 -stable releases in the 2.6.15 cycle didn't have any 
>> immediate corresponding gentoo-sources bump since the patches were 
>> already included. The fact that we include patches alongside -stable 
>> means that using their notation isn't entirely accurate in our situation.
> 
> Both naming schemes have their advantages, but I see more
> disadvantages with using the 2.6.x.y naming scheme in gentoo-sources
> than I see advantages (primarily the reason Daniel stated above).
> 
> I suggest we keep the current naming scheme for gentoo-sources, as it
> seems most correct.
> 
> Regards,
> Brix

fwiw, I've got mips-sources modified to follow the upstream kernel.org notation 
of 2.6.x.y (even though our primary upstream, linux-mips.org, doesn't utilize 
this notation at all).

There's logic in the ebuild that can switch between using -rc, point releases 
(the .y ones) and standard versions, and it modifies the logic to fetch the 
appropriate patch(es) from upstream to save on what we need to upload to the 
gentoo mirrors.

Been following this since ~2.6.12, and we haven't had any issues with the 
versioning in portage or reported from users.  mips-headers even uses it now.


--Kumba

-- 
Gentoo/MIPS Team Lead
Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees

"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands 
do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere."  --Elrond
-- 
gentoo-kernel@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-kernel] [ANNOUNCE] genpatches-2.6.16-2 release

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 795 bytes --]

Hi Kumba,

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 11:37:15PM -0500, Kumba wrote:
> fwiw, I've got mips-sources modified to follow the upstream kernel.org 
> notation of 2.6.x.y (even though our primary upstream, linux-mips.org, 
> doesn't utilize this notation at all).

mips-sources doesn't use genpatches, so the two can not really be
compared.

> There's logic in the ebuild that can switch between using -rc, point 
> releases (the .y ones) and standard versions, and it modifies the logic to 
> fetch the appropriate patch(es) from upstream to save on what we need to 
> upload to the gentoo mirrors.

The logic for doing so in genpatches based sources are in kernel-2.eclass.

Regards,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 213 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-kernel] [ANNOUNCE] genpatches-2.6.16-2 release

[John Mylchreest]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1147 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 11:37:15PM -0500, Kumba <kumba@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> fwiw, I've got mips-sources modified to follow the upstream kernel.org 
> notation of 2.6.x.y (even though our primary upstream, linux-mips.org, 
> doesn't utilize this notation at all).
> 
> There's logic in the ebuild that can switch between using -rc, point 
> releases (the .y ones) and standard versions, and it modifies the logic to 
> fetch the appropriate patch(es) from upstream to save on what we need to 
> upload to the gentoo mirrors.
> 
> Been following this since ~2.6.12, and we haven't had any issues with the 
> versioning in portage or reported from users.  mips-headers even uses it 
> now.

On that note, whats the chances of getting mips-sources/headers to use
kernel-2? ALl the logic exists already in there anyways (has done for
ages) and it would reduce that 500 odd line ebuild down to ~50 :)

-- 
Role:            Gentoo Linux Kernel Lead
Gentoo Linux:    http://www.gentoo.org
Public Key:      gpg --recv-keys 9C745515
Key fingerprint: A0AF F3C8 D699 A05A EC5C  24F7 95AA 241D 9C74 5515


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]