Martin posted on Sun, 29 Sep 2013 22:55:43 +0100 as excerpted: > On 29/09/13 22:29, Martin wrote: > >> Looking up what's available for Gentoo, the maintainers there look to >> be nicely sharp with multiple versions available all the way up to >> kernel 3.11.2...
Cool, another gentooer! =:^) > That is being pulled in now as expected: > > sys-kernel/gentoo-sources-3.11.2 FWIW, I've been doing my own kernels (mainline) since back on mandrake a decade ago, and I just changed up my scripts a bit when I switched to gentoo. Then later on I changed them up a bit more to be able to run git kernels. These days I normally first try (and switch to if no serious bugs) to the dev kernel around -rc2 or so, by which point I figure anything likely to eat my system for breakfast should be either worked thru, or at least news of it available. As a non-dev, it's very cool being able to spot and report bugs, possibly bisecting to a specific commit, and watch them get fixed before general kernel release. Just one way I as a non-dev can contribute back. =:^) To take care of packages that depend on a kernel package, I used to have a kernel (gentoo-sources-2.6.9999 or some such, back then, now of course it'd be 3.9999) in package.provided, but these days I don't even need that. =:^) >> There's also the latest available from btrfs tools with >> sys-fs/btrfs-progs "9999"... > > Oddly, that caused emerge to report: > > [ebuild UD ] sys-fs/btrfs-progs-0.19.11 [0.20_rc1_p358] 0 kB > > which is a *downgrade*. Hence, I'm keeping with the 0.20_rc1_p358. btrfs-progs-9999 is available, but as a live package, it's masked in keeping with gentoo policy. So to get it you'd need to unmask it. But 0.20_rc1_p358 shouldn't be /too/ far back. In fact, I'm guessing the p-number is the (serialized) patch sequence number indicating the number of commits forward from the rc1 tag. And on the (locally unmasked) -9999 version here, a git describe --tags gives me v0.20-rc1-358-g194aa4a ... so 0.20_rc1_p358 is very likely identical to the live version at this point, and it makes no difference, except that the non-live version is a stable snapshot instead of a version that might change every time you merge it, if upstream has done any further commits. So btrfs-progs-0.20_rc1_p358 should be fine. And you were updating kernel to 3.11.2, so that should be fine by the time you read this, as well. =:^) -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
