From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA071198005 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 07:01:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B368BE075B; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 07:01:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from relaygateway02.edpnet.net (relaygateway02.edpnet.net [212.71.1.211]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BDAA7E0741 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 07:01:54 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AgEFAIhcLFFPhOx7/2dsb2JhbABFwWaBAhdzgh8BAQQBViIRCxgJFg8JAwIBAgEPDAweEwYCAQGHfQMJCgivYYYXDYlajDOBEAaBSINAA44vhjGHU4VahReDCIFoCRc X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,739,1355094000"; d="scan'208,217";a="141635381" Received: from 79.132.236.123.bro02.dyn.edpnet.net (HELO james.de-leeuw.org) ([79.132.236.123]) by relaygateway02.edpnet.net with ESMTP; 26 Feb 2013 08:01:54 +0100 Received: from [192.168.1.126] (unknown [192.168.1.126]) by james.de-leeuw.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3595D20001 for ; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:01:53 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <512C5DE0.4000407@de-leeuw.org> Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 08:01:52 +0100 From: Thierry User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130224 Thunderbird/17.0.3 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-kernel@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-kernel@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-kernel@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-kernel] Re: Which Kernel? References: <20130225142608.GA13945@kroah.com> <512B9EF9.7080509@gmail.com> <20130225190007.72dccbda@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20130225190007.72dccbda@gentoo.org> Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------080000010602030308020400" X-Archives-Salt: 2b815ccc-d90d-4865-9dc2-8addc643c949 X-Archives-Hash: 1da7b9fa1f886b2f655b370992410684 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------080000010602030308020400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi, I do not understand why linux-headers package is behind the kernel release (at the time of writing, the latest unstable is 3.7, while 3.8 is out for some time. Is it manage by another team? Should it be managed by the kernel team to ensure that releases are in line? Thanks Thierry On 02/25/13 19:00, Tom Wijsman wrote: > On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 12:27:21 -0500 > "Gino!" wrote: > >> Firstly thanks for all your great responses... >> >> On 02/25/2013 09:26 AM, Greg KH wrote: >>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 01:05:01AM -0500, Gino! wrote: >>>> So, it seems like gentoo-sources loves EOL kernels.. >>>> can anybody tell me why this is, it seems like that would be a bad >>>> thing... I always move up to the latest amd64 stable, but 3.7.9 is >>>> super buggy (nvidia and aufs3 complain among others) >>> What is "super buggy" about 3.7.9? Have you reported this anywhere? >>> >> I as a stable packages only, style gentoo user have an (perhaps >> unrealistic), expectation that kernels that go stable have some >> vetting process with all other stable packages, and I can expect no >> failed interactions between things.. this is not yet true with >> 3.7.9... > This makes the stabilization process unnecessary long; again, it's the > responsibility of other packages to work with the kernel, not the other > way around. We have waited long enough (several 3.7 versions) for those > packages to be patched; and besides that we had to wait for nouveau to > somewhat become more reliable as well, since they did a major refactor > in early 3.7 that broke it for some people. > > Stabilizing more kernel versions but making sure they work together with > other packages is impossible with the limited kernel team we currently > have, remember that this has been just mpagano for a while [1] and that > out of everyone that responded [2] nobody else really stayed around. > > [1]: http://www.mpagano.com/blog/?p=165 > [2]: http://www.mpagano.com/blog/?p=167 > >>>> although I would feel allot more comfortable with something like >>>> 3.4.33!! but its at 3.4.9... >>>> >>>> Do you gentoo-sources folks recommend a particular release for >>>> Long Term Stable ongoing support??? >>> If you have to have something like this, then use the versions that >>> upstream is saying is going to be "long term", meaning the 3.0 or >>> 3.4 releases. But note that new hardware will not work on these >>> releases, so you will be out of luck if you have really modern >>> hardware, sorry. >>> >>>> Thats the one i want to use. >>> Why? What does something like this buy you in a rolling-release >>> distro like Gentoo? >> I would prefer to not constantly use new kernel implementations, >> sometimes new features come out, and I may need some old package, that >> depends on the older feature.. I would like for it to operate >> smoothly.. my most recent example of this would be changes to how >> wireless drivers are implemented, >> the new stuff is great but if my old packages don't work, its no good >> for me. >> I would like an (*slightly) older kernel that maintains security >> patches and maintenance repairs for a long period of time.. > Then following 3.4 is the way to go, I'll hear for stabilization... > > > With kind regards, > > Tom Wijsman (TomWij) > Gentoo Developer > > E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org > GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D > GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D --------------080000010602030308020400 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi,

I do not understand why linux-headers package is behind the kernel release (at the time of writing, the latest unstable is 3.7, while 3.8 is out for some time. Is it manage by another team? Should it be managed by the kernel team to ensure that releases are in line?

Thanks

Thierry
On 02/25/13 19:00, Tom Wijsman wrote:
On Mon, 25 Feb 2013 12:27:21 -0500
"Gino!" <ginolovesyou@gmail.com> wrote:


Firstly thanks for all your great responses...

On 02/25/2013 09:26 AM, Greg KH wrote:

On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 01:05:01AM -0500, Gino! wrote:

So, it seems like gentoo-sources loves EOL kernels..
can anybody tell me why this is, it seems like that would be a bad
thing... I always move up to the latest amd64 stable, but 3.7.9 is
super buggy (nvidia and aufs3 complain among others)

What is "super buggy" about 3.7.9?  Have you reported this anywhere?


I as a stable packages only, style gentoo user have an (perhaps
unrealistic), expectation that kernels that go stable have some
vetting process with all other stable packages, and I can expect no
failed interactions between things.. this is not yet true with
3.7.9...

This makes the stabilization process unnecessary long; again, it's the
responsibility of other packages to work with the kernel, not the other
way around. We have waited long enough (several 3.7 versions) for those
packages to be patched; and besides that we had to wait for nouveau to
somewhat become more reliable as well, since they did a major refactor
in early 3.7 that broke it for some people.

Stabilizing more kernel versions but making sure they work together with
other packages is impossible with the limited kernel team we currently
have, remember that this has been just mpagano for a while [1] and that
out of everyone that responded [2] nobody else really stayed around.

 [1]: http://www.mpagano.com/blog/?p=165
 [2]: http://www.mpagano.com/blog/?p=167


although I would feel allot more comfortable with something like
3.4.33!! but its at 3.4.9...

Do you gentoo-sources folks recommend a particular release for
Long Term Stable ongoing support???

If you have to have something like this, then use the versions that
upstream is saying is going to be "long term", meaning the 3.0 or
3.4 releases.  But note that new hardware will not work on these
releases, so you will be out of luck if you have really modern
hardware, sorry.


Thats the one i want to use.

Why?  What does something like this buy you in a rolling-release
distro like Gentoo?

I would prefer to not constantly use new kernel implementations,
sometimes new features come out, and I may need some old package, that
depends on the older feature.. I would like for it to operate
smoothly.. my most recent example of this would be changes to how
wireless drivers are implemented,
the new stuff is great but if my old packages don't work, its no good
for me.
I would like an (*slightly) older kernel that maintains security
patches and maintenance repairs for a long period of time..

Then following 3.4 is the way to go, I'll hear for stabilization...


With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D

--------------080000010602030308020400--