Michael Jones wrote: > > Again, no animosity against anyone: > > But Rich, Linux-4.19.97 was released on Jan 17th, and then > gentoo-sources-4.19.97 was released on Jan 18th, > whereas https://bugs.gentoo.org/706036 was acknowledged to be fixed by > Linux-4.19.99 on Jan 29th, and it's now Feb 9th and no newer > gentoo-sources package has been stabilized. > > So we've got some inconsistency in how the gentoo-sources package is > stabilized. You don't mind going directly with the upstream package, > but I personally do, which is why I used the gentoo-sources package > for my kernel needs in large part because I have trust in the Gentoo > distribution to provide that small but crucial extra layer of insider > knowledge on how likely a particular upstream kernel release is going > to break my systems. > > I certainly don't have a relationship with Gentoo where I pay money to > someone and expect some kind of service level guarantees, so honestly > this email is just a lot of hot-air. But if Gentoo wants to provide > good experiences to end users who are updating their kernels, I > personally think it's worth considering the release cadance and > whether the currently used one is the right fit for the actual goals > of the project. > > I'm not saying the current cadance isn't the right one, and i'm not > saying it is. I'm just saying in this particular situation, it didn't > fit one specific end-users needs, and maybe that's fine, and maybe > it's not. I'm not the one putting in the work, so I'm not going to say > the project *should* take an action. Just point out that there was a > problem from my perspective. >
There is a kernel mailing list that posts when there is updates. You may want to subscribe to that and if nothing else, just monitor it for when there is new updates. I'm not sure but I think you can reply/post to that list as well if there is a question or problem. You can subscribe by emailing this address just like you did for this mailing list. gentoo-kernel+subscr...@lists.gentoo.org Hope that helps. Dale :-) :-)
