Hi Martin,
On Friday, 25 Mar 2005, Martin 'Joey' Schulze wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 04:09:42PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > Absolutely. It's bound to happen again. We also need to figure out
> > how to do driver updates during sarge's lifetime. I suspect v
* Steve Langasek ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050325 02:05]:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 03:30:01PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > That is irritating, but less so than rebooting and discovering you need to
> > run `module-assistant auto-install ` to compile a module for an ABI
> > change (and if the machin
Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 04:09:42PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > How big is the chance that we will have another ABI change during
> > sarge's lifetime (100%?). So it can't hurd to figure out the problems
> > with that now independently of our decision in this matter..
Sven Luther wrote:
> > We'd need at least a list of module packages that we need to
> > recompile when a kernel update changes the ABI and all the
> > modules become void.
> >
> > This also means that we need to be able to rebuild modules from
> > their corresponding source package.
>
> Notice th
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 17:02:29 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 03:30:01PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
>> (ignoring -release followup-to, since it affects -kernel and -boot as well)
>
> Sorry, mailer misfire, I guess.
>
>> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 03:24:53 -0800, Steve Langasek w
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 03:30:01PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> (ignoring -release followup-to, since it affects -kernel and -boot as well)
Sorry, mailer misfire, I guess.
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 03:24:53 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > recompiles on every revision of a kernel-image package, wh
(ignoring -release followup-to, since it affects -kernel and -boot as well)
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 03:24:53 -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 04:31:24AM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
[...]
>> My idea is to do away w/ ABI considerations, and instead compile modules
>> in the kerne
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 04:31:24AM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> The way that arch/subarch specific patches are handled needs to be thought
> out. There are architectures that are close to linus kernels, and there
> are those that aren't. The preferred way to do things is to have
> something sim
Andres Salomon wrote:
> Cons:
- Does not address issues with d-i udebs and abi changes at all.
- It becomes impossible to include third-party modules in d-i, since we
have no precompiled modules for them anymore.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 04:31:24AM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > Now, for this to be fully efficient, there is still a little change that
> > needs done to d-i. Support for the kernel meta-packages for all arches.
> > A common kernel-official or whatever package will be created, including
> > a
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 09:24:48 +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
[...]
> The proposal is the following :
>
> 1) now that rc3 is out we forget about the current kernels, well, not
> exactly, but we forget about the current kernel build system,
> including .udebs.
>
> 2) we take as basis the ubuntu
On Thu, Mar 24, 2005 at 03:39:02AM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> > My idea would be to have a mechanism for loading modules earlier, and
> > move the initrd initialization as early as possible, and load modules
> > from there even before we do stuff like serial console setup or
> > framebuffer set
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 08:56:52 +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 11:53:45PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
>> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:10:18 +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>>
>> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:13:32PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
[...]
>
> Well, i was thinking about handling
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 01:35:47AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> Hi Joey,
>
> As I touched on briefly on IRC, there is an upcoming kernel security fix
> that requires a bit of discussion. It appears that one of the security
> fixes that was included in kernel-source-2.6.8 2.6.8-14 (and backed ou
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 11:53:45PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:10:18 +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:13:32PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> >> OTOH, I have hardware that's already not supported by sarge (VIA video
> >> chipset that's only suppor
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 23:10:18 +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:13:32PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
>> OTOH, I have hardware that's already not supported by sarge (VIA video
>> chipset that's only supported by xorg). As much as the security team is
>> loathe to support multip
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 05:07:08PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 01:35:47AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > - Add the security fix in before sarge's release, with a change to the
> > package names to reflect the ABI change. This will probably require at
> > least a
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 04:09:42PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 01:35:47AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > RC3 of Debian Installer is already being finalized, with only the CD builds
> > to finish up today and tomorrow; the ABI change is being held of testing in
> > th
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 03:13:32PM -0500, Andres Salomon wrote:
> OTOH, I have hardware that's already not supported by sarge (VIA video
> chipset that's only supported by xorg). As much as the security team is
> loathe to support multiple kernels, it does seem like having multiple
> kernels in d-
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 19:27:20 +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 04:09:42PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
>> How big is the chance that we will have another ABI change during
>> sarge's lifetime (100%?). So it can't hurd to figure out the problems
>> with that now independentl
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 07:27:20PM +, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 04:09:42PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> > How big is the chance that we will have another ABI change during
> > sarge's lifetime (100%?). So it can't hurd to figure out the problems
> > with that now inde
* Andres Salomon ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [050323 20:00]:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:30:38 +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> > * Humberto Massa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-23 10:25]:
> >> Important question: is sarge *really* being released in the next 1 or 2
> >> months? If not, there is no good reason
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 04:09:42PM +0100, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> How big is the chance that we will have another ABI change during
> sarge's lifetime (100%?). So it can't hurd to figure out the problems
> with that now independently of our decision in this matter...
Absolutely. It's bound to
On Wed, 23 Mar 2005 13:30:38 +, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
> * Humberto Massa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-23 10:25]:
>> Important question: is sarge *really* being released in the next 1 or 2
>> months? If not, there is no good reason not to do this. All the other
>> stuff that is going on in s
On Wednesday 23 March 2005 16:09, Frank Lichtenheld wrote:
> My experience with the whole kernel stuff is limited so excuse the
> question: Where is the bottleneck? Building the kernels, testing the
> kernels or whatever else?
IMHO the main problem is that currently loads of other patches are stil
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 01:35:47AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> - Add the security fix in before sarge's release, with a change to the
> package names to reflect the ABI change. This will probably require at
> least a month to get all kernel images rebuilt and integrated into a
> debian-in
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 01:35:47AM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> RC3 of Debian Installer is already being finalized, with only the CD builds
> to finish up today and tomorrow; the ABI change is being held of testing in
> the meantime. This leaves the following possible options:
>
> - Add the sec
* Humberto Massa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-03-23 10:25]:
> Important question: is sarge *really* being released in the next 1 or 2
> months? If not, there is no good reason not to do this. All the other
> stuff that is going on in sarge can be done in parallel with this, and
> d-i won't be the bot
Steve Langasek wrote, among other stuff:
>As I touched on briefly on IRC, there is an upcoming kernel security
>fix that requires a bit of discussion. It appears that one of the
>security fixes that was included in kernel-source-2.6.8 2.6.8-14 (and
>backed out, at least temporarily, in 2.6.8-15),
On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 11:33:05AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote:
> Horms wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am finally nearing the bottom of my todo list for the
> > up and coming release of kernel-source-2.4.27 2.4.27-9.
> > And to date, the only ABI change I have is for CAN-2005-0449,
> > as per my mail
Horms wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I am finally nearing the bottom of my todo list for the
> up and coming release of kernel-source-2.4.27 2.4.27-9.
> And to date, the only ABI change I have is for CAN-2005-0449,
> as per my mail yesterday.
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2005/03/msg00689.html
>
Hi,
I am finally nearing the bottom of my todo list for the
up and coming release of kernel-source-2.4.27 2.4.27-9.
And to date, the only ABI change I have is for CAN-2005-0449,
as per my mail yesterday.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2005/03/msg00689.html
To the best of my knowledge 2.6
Hi Joey,
As I touched on briefly on IRC, there is an upcoming kernel security fix
that requires a bit of discussion. It appears that one of the security
fixes that was included in kernel-source-2.6.8 2.6.8-14 (and backed out, at
least temporarily, in 2.6.8-15), changes the kernel module ABI for a
33 matches
Mail list logo
