On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 08:50:17PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 2011/6/30 Dave Jones <[email protected]>:
> > I've just pushed a f15-2.6.39 branch which contains a work in progress
> > rebase.
> > The only thing that I'm really concerned about in this right now is X
> > regressions.
> > We had a drm-next backport to .38 and moving that to .39 turned up a ton
> > of rejects.
> > I fixed up a few by hand, but the resulting compile failures made my head
> > hurt, so
> > I've mostly left them disabled. If the nouveau/intel drm dudes could look
> > over
> > that branch and fix up whatever is necessary, we can look at getting this
> > out
> > to people soon.
> >
> > (looking ahead, after its release pushing 3.0.x as 2.6.40 is probably
> > going to
> > happen,
>
> I ask out of curiosity - why 2.6.40? Is it a big problem to run 3.0 on F15?
A lot of broken software is assuming version numbers are 2.6.x. We could push a
load
of userspace packages to fix it, but that's just the stuff we control. 3rd
party add-ons
would break for no good reason.
This deviates from what upstream calls it, but it's just a number, and not
breaking
existing code in an update is more important here. For f16 of course, we'll
make
the 3.0 transition, because moving to a new release has differing expectations,
and by the time it ships, hopefully everything that cares will be fixed.
Dave
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list
[email protected]
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
