On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 10:28:55AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> I hope very soon; I have OOM killer fixes (purely functional issues,
>> i.e. refcounting mm's) waiting for 2.4.28-pre1.
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 08:37:40PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> anything more precise than soon ? We need
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 05:20:09PM +, Thomas Skybakmoen wrote:
>> Here goes the forth 2.4.27 release candidate.
>> It includes a dozen of USB fixes, JFS update, IA64 fixes,
>> networking update, amongst others.
>> 2.4.27 final should be out soon.
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 07:29:34PM +0200, Sven
What is discussed here, should not this apply to kernel 2.4.27 wich is soon
out the door as well, also has had a looong test run, yes know it`s summer,
but 2.6 and 2.4- what`s comming seems like better than 2.4.26 and 2.6.7, and
yes one can always go on and say the next will be better d`oh, but
What is discussed here, should not this apply to kernel 2.4.27 wich is soon
out the door as well, also has had a looong test run, yes know it`s summer,
but 2.6 and 2.4- what`s comming seems like better than 2.4.26 and 2.6.7, and
yes one can always go on and say the next will be better d`oh, but
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 10:28:55AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 05:20:09PM +, Thomas Skybakmoen wrote:
> >> Here goes the forth 2.4.27 release candidate.
> >> It includes a dozen of USB fixes, JFS update, IA64 fixes,
> >> networking update, amongst others.
> >>
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 05:20:09PM +, Thomas Skybakmoen wrote:
> What is discussed here, should not this apply to kernel 2.4.27 wich is soon
Well, i (and probably the rest of the debian-kernel team) care only little
about 2.4 kernels, but sure you have a point.
> out the door as well, also h
leasing rc2, or by requesting that the FTP Masters
> >> special-case kernel-*2.6.8* stuff. Which of these seems like the
> >> easier, foolproof way to do things? :)
> >
> > ftp-masters special casing 2.6.8. But an upload to experimental would be
> > still
easier, foolproof way to do things? :)
>
> ftp-masters special casing 2.6.8. But an upload to experimental would be
> still good to help pave the way to the real release, and given the
> current subversion build system and small patches, there may even be
> chance that the 2.6.8 releas
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 02:40:57AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 11:16:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Planning to violate the release schedule is not encouraged.
>
> > No, but let's be realist. The woody release schedule was also announced in a
> > hurry (of the no i
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 11:16:34AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > Planning to violate the release schedule is not encouraged.
> No, but let's be realist. The woody release schedule was also announced in a
> hurry (of the no info for month, and then we freeze tomorrow), and then we
> waited almost t
lf weeks total before
> > > the packages enter testing, and that's assuming
>
> > > a) 2.6.8 release happens within a week
> > > b) it takes 2 weeks to get out of NEW
>
> > With proper cooperation from the ftp-masters, this could happen much
> > fa
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 09:09:56AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > After chatting w/ some of the -boot people on IRC, I'm unconvinced that 2
> > weeks is enough time. We're talking about 4 and a half weeks total before
> > the packages enter testing, and that'
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 09:55:02AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 08:54:08AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > the revision or the version is about the same amount of work to get it
> > > being used. So no gain there.
> >
> > And its too late for d-i anyway, was probably
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 08:54:08AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > the revision or the version is about the same amount of work to get it
> > being used. So no gain there.
>
> And its too late for d-i anyway, was probably already last week. Even my
> 2.6.7-4 .udeb kernels didn't make it in.
Well,
n
> > Jun 25 kernel-image-2.6.7-i386 uploaded
> > Jul 02 kernel-source-2.6.7 and kernel-image-2.6.7-i386 accepted
> > Jul 04 kernel-image-2.6.7-powerpc accepted
> >
> > All in all, I would suggest to just forget this -rc business.
> >
> > Regards, Je
On Mon, Aug 02, 2004 at 01:51:20AM +0200, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 04:57:40AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> >> At some point in the past, I wrote:
> >> >> The 2.6.8 rele
Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 04:57:40AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
>> At some point in the past, I wrote:
>> >> The 2.6.8 release has been almost exclusively focused on stabilization.
>> >> I highly recommend a
On Sun, Aug 01, 2004 at 04:57:40AM -0700, William Lee Irwin III wrote:
> At some point in the past, I wrote:
> >> The 2.6.8 release has been almost exclusively focused on stabilization.
> >> I highly recommend adopting as much of 2.6.8 as possible if not the
> >>
At some point in the past, I wrote:
>> The 2.6.8 release has been almost exclusively focused on stabilization.
>> I highly recommend adopting as much of 2.6.8 as possible if not the
>> whole delta between 2.6.7 and 2.6.8. If not incrementing the version
>> number aft
ix release, as it was claimed by Christoph and William, then
> > upgrading to 2.6.8 should just be a replacement of the package which would
> > have zero influence on the rest of the base system, as opposed to changing a
> > base library which would mean lot of incompatibility in othe
20 matches
Mail list logo
