trimmed release again from cc. please do not spam our hard working release manager.
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 11:05:20AM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote: > martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Are we sure we want 2.6.18 as the kernel for etch? I reported two > > bugs, #391929 and #391955, the first of which is readily > > reproducible on 2.6.18 only (including ABI -2), meaning I cannot see > > the problem with 2.6.17. #391955 is rather sporadic. > > > > I know the kernel team has been incredibly busy, but I have received > > zero reaction to my bug reports, which makes me think that they may > > not have been seen? After all, I did originally assign them to the > > kernel packages causing the problems: linux-image-2.6.18-1-amd64 and > > linux-image-2.6.18-1-686, rather than the linux-2.6 source package; > > they're reassigned now. > > At least for XEN 2.6.17 has serious problems. I have three machines > that are unable to boot with 2.6.17 and them work fine with 2.6.18. the choice is out of discussion, 2.6.17 is not supported since long. and we focus on a good 2.6.18 release, look at the changelogs.. :) > > Do we really want to release 2.6.18 with etch? If I alone am already > > able to identify two hard kernel freezes, there must be plenty > > others, no? Do we want to lock out users into 2.6.18 with its bugs? > > Well, we'll probably need to rely on bugfix releases of 2.6.18 after > etch is release too. well we want also a newer linux-image for etch in a mid-term release. that was not possible for sarge due to the heavy devfs dependency of core tools like initrd or d-i and so on.. best regards -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
