03.01.2015 00:53, Mike Pagano пишет:
On Saturday, January 03, 2015 12:39:39 AM Mikle Kolyada wrote:
02.01.2015 20:25, Mike Pagano пишет:
This is in no way complaining about how long it takes to stabilize a
kernel.
As for this fact.
hat type=arch teams developer
The main problem is that:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 3:31 AM, Sergey Popov pinkb...@gentoo.org wrote:
So, i like your idea to stick stable to the LTS kernel. While it can
lead to potential problems with some external modules(which are, for
example, marked stable now but does not support 3.4 kernel) the majority
of really
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 01/15/2015 11:01 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 3:31 AM, Sergey Popov pinkb...@gentoo.org
wrote:
So, i like your idea to stick stable to the LTS kernel. While it
can lead to potential problems with some external modules(which
El vie, 02-01-2015 a las 12:25 -0500, Mike Pagano escribió:
Hello, Everyone,
Are there solid arguments for stabilizing any version of gentoo-sources? I
think the valid arguments for not stabilizing gentoo-sources can be garnered
from the thread about not stabilizing vanilla-sources[1].
On Saturday, January 03, 2015 11:18:26 AM Pacho Ramos wrote:
El vie, 02-01-2015 a las 12:25 -0500, Mike Pagano escribió:
Hello, Everyone,
[2] http://packages.gentoo.org/package/sys-kernel/gentoo-sources
In my case I still run only stable gentoo-sources in many machines to
prevent
El sáb, 03-01-2015 a las 10:14 -0500, Mike Pagano escribió:
[...]
Hi, Pacho,
I think if you read further in the thread and find Ian's suggestion, it
should
cover your needs nicely.
Mike
Yeah, that suggestion looks nice to me, thanks :)
On Friday, January 02, 2015 01:10:21 PM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
Resending as I replied to Ian instead of the list by accident. (sorry, Ian)
On 02/01/15 12:25 PM, Mike Pagano wrote:
Hello, Everyone,
Are there solid arguments for stabilizing any version of
gentoo-sources? I think the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/01/15 03:17 PM, Mike Pagano wrote:
On Friday, January 02, 2015 03:11:22 PM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 02/01/15 02:57 PM, Mike Pagano wrote:
I understand your point. Maybe waiting a few days to auto
stable makes sense, because less than 7
On Friday, January 02, 2015 04:05:42 PM Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Mike Pagano mpag...@gentoo.org wrote:
To summarize.
In this instance, as this moment:
1. Only enter stable req bugs for 3.18 and 3.17.
I assume this bit is just a transition since we don't
Hello, Everyone,
Are there solid arguments for stabilizing any version of gentoo-sources? I
think the valid arguments for not stabilizing gentoo-sources can be garnered
from the thread about not stabilizing vanilla-sources[1].
This is in no way complaining about how long it takes to
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 3:44 PM, Mike Pagano mpag...@gentoo.org wrote:
To summarize.
In this instance, as this moment:
1. Only enter stable req bugs for 3.18 and 3.17.
I assume this bit is just a transition since we don't want to
downgrade from 3.17/18 to 3.14, and that once we get the next
On Friday, January 02, 2015 03:11:22 PM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 02/01/15 02:57 PM, Mike Pagano wrote:
I understand your point. Maybe waiting a few days to auto stable
makes sense, because less than 7 days later, a new version with
bug/security fixes is released.
Isn't our current
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/01/15 02:57 PM, Mike Pagano wrote:
I understand your point. Maybe waiting a few days to auto stable
makes sense, because less than 7 days later, a new version with
bug/security fixes is released.
Isn't our current rate of stabilization
02.01.2015 20:25, Mike Pagano пишет:
This is in no way complaining about how long it takes to stabilize a kernel.
As for this fact.
hat type=arch teams developer
The main problem is that: we only can test sources on machine we can
reboot. For example me and Agostino
have access to the rest
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/01/15 12:25 PM, Mike Pagano wrote:
Hello, Everyone,
Are there solid arguments for stabilizing any version of
gentoo-sources? I think the valid arguments for not stabilizing
gentoo-sources can be garnered from the thread about not
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
The thing about stable gentoo-sources is that it shows that it's been
tested, and ideally that testing's been done against the rdeps of the
kernel package too (ie, external modules). ...
That said, given the frequency of
On Friday, January 02, 2015 02:18:24 PM Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
The thing about stable gentoo-sources is that it shows that it's been
tested, and ideally that testing's been done against the rdeps of the
kernel package too
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/01/15 02:57 PM, Mike Pagano wrote:
I understand your point. Maybe waiting a few days to auto stable
makes sense, because less than 7 days later, a new version with
On Saturday, January 03, 2015 12:39:39 AM Mikle Kolyada wrote:
02.01.2015 20:25, Mike Pagano пишет:
This is in no way complaining about how long it takes to stabilize a
kernel.
As for this fact.
hat type=arch teams developer
The main problem is that: we only can test sources on machine
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 5:52 PM, Diamond diam...@hi-net.ru wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 12:25:56 -0500
Mike Pagano mpag...@gentoo.org wrote:
Kernel versions are coming out 1-2 a week at this point.
There's also a problem to upgrade kernel for a user every 1-2 week by
hands using make oldconfig
On Fri, 02 Jan 2015 12:25:56 -0500
Mike Pagano mpag...@gentoo.org wrote:
Are there solid arguments for stabilizing any version of
gentoo-sources? I think the valid arguments for not stabilizing
gentoo-sources can be garnered from the thread about not stabilizing
vanilla-sources[1].
This
On Friday, January 02, 2015 03:22:31 PM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 02/01/15 03:17 PM, Mike Pagano wrote:
On Friday, January 02, 2015 03:11:22 PM Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
On 02/01/15 02:57 PM, Mike Pagano wrote:
I understand your point. Maybe waiting a few days to auto
stable makes sense,
On Friday, January 02, 2015 03:30:40 PM Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Jan 2, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Ian Stakenvicius a...@gentoo.org wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 02/01/15 02:57 PM, Mike Pagano wrote:
I understand your point. Maybe waiting a few days to auto stable
23 matches
Mail list logo
