From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KLi5H-0000Ll-Nw for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:25:03 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0128AE05F0; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:25:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wf-out-1314.google.com (wf-out-1314.google.com [209.85.200.175]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8652E05F0 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 17:25:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wf-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 23so2146835wfg.10 for ; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:25:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to :subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; bh=rs3Y7S8wKL/L5zT2NW5dpDdSLYdR6/JJbYYisVx5vQ0=; b=LoKF0vJAYyD7Qqmmk+3aTr42AC20ComU2ZZ08FrggcYggpGaPNztWdXyMMLrAUoMw0 6z4aLTH6KziPFEWzPRqMLZL3dmWlA4CsXCpKfvX74RBdlp8FL1fL9OfHmBN0XhrN94Io viksXayyvsKUIfBiW5z+ppXjPSRLinv1OzZy0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=YY56twvDUzxgs+PmlbYdriXBBZL0YH6yH27PfnE/MTbliVfrF1VNdiBMvGnqya58pt fAKJXQHTWzb0FBk3hkFcOTKz1Yk6ycG/WrbNTDSmPAHRwXPy8EmfytkWG7A+f6zmK/Vs Xn0hT71vevPjB6EDFbavaoV9BTrWID5kybvo4= Received: by 10.142.169.4 with SMTP id r4mr12643wfe.63.1216833901262; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:25:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.171.1 with HTTP; Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:25:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <9acccfe50807231025jcac47c8gb6e805d81e6157cf@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2008 10:25:01 -0700 From: "Kevin O'Gorman" To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel 2.6.25-r6 oddities; is this kernel really ready for stable? In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <9acccfe50807230952y795535cck52a8872d42b805c6@mail.gmail.com> X-Archives-Salt: 19220b5e-8a0e-44cd-9c52-5f0b7642d1f2 X-Archives-Hash: 6a20e280d4b7c4d22097e81c591a0f9e On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 10:04 AM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: > Kevin O'Gorman wrote: >> >> I run gentoo x86 stable, so that I usually avoid this sort of thing. >> >> This kernel, however, looks balky to me, because it's reporting >> warnings and other oddities during compilation. I don't like warnings >> at any time, and with the kernel's make wrappers cleaning up the >> output they tend to stand out. >> >> Here's what I get: >> -- various type/attribute warnings >> -- reports of deprecated elements >> -- a report of "section mismatches", and instructions to use "make >> CONFIG_DEBUG_SECTION_MISMATCH=y" to find details. >> >> All that being said, the compilation completes, and I can boot it. I >> don't know the cause, but I have been unable to get vmware-server >> running on it, and I'm going back to the previous kernel for that >> reason. > > I hope you're not implying that a kernel should not be declared stable > simply because a vmware product lags behind in kernel support? vmware 4 > lacks support for kernel 2.6 alltogether, maybe we should only have 2.4 > stable because of that. I am not suggesting that the vmware stuff should prevent releasing a kernel. I am suggesting that pages of cryptic and unusual output, not to mention warnings and deprecation from the kernel's own make is cause for users to worry about the kernel and wonder WTF. ++ kevin -- Kevin O'Gorman, PhD