On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 19:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Wed, 2014-07-09 at 18:59 +0100, Adam D. Barratt wrote: > > On Sun, 2014-06-29 at 04:14 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > On Wed, 2014-06-11 at 16:39 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > > I intend to upload linux version 3.2.60-1 to stable-proposed-updates at > > > > the weekend. Let me know if there's a reason not to do this. > > > > > > I've just uploaded now. > > > > The upload has since had some wider exposure as a result of being used > > as the basis for a security release. In the process, a few bugs have > > been reported regarding regressions in networking - for instance, > > #754173, #754197 and #754294. > > I think those are all the same bug.
Quite possibly. > For what it's worth, my home router is running the new version without > any such problem. Thanks for the data point. > > If it weren't for the security fix, I'd be inclined to suggest that we > > skip 3.2.60 at this point, to give us more time to address the > > regressions; that may still not be the worst idea, as it at least allows > > people to easily downgrade to the current stable kernel. > > > > Thoughts welcome. > > As there aren't any major changes to hardware support in this version, > there will be little benefit from rebuilding the installer using > 3.2.60-1. So I'm OK with leaving wheezy as it is. We already rebuilt the installer purely as a part of our process, but I'd assumed that it would not be particularly affected by any of the regressions. > I'm hoping to be able to fix the regressions (probably with a revert) in > another security update by the time of the point release. That sounds good; thanks. Regards, Adam -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1404930921.1894.9.ca...@jacala.jungle.funky-badger.org