On 2014-08-18 15:16, Andreas Färber wrote:
Hi,
Am 18.08.2014 13:01, schrieb Takashi Iwai:
[...] what do you think of backup maintenance of Kernel:stable during your absence? Would you mind if anyone of kernel team takes over the role?
On a related matter, are the scripts that are used to maintain Kernel:HEAD and Kernel:stable actually in some public place others can submit patches against?
* Kernel:stable "ARM" repository is building against openSUSE:12.2:ARM and failing with unresolvable pesign-obs-integration. Suggest to drop it, as armv7l and aarch64 are covered by the "ports" repository already.
This is set in rpm/config.sh in the kernel-source repository. I'll drop the ARM repo.
* Both Kernel:HEAD and Kernel:stable try to build "ARM" repository for x86_64, which is senseless (unresolvable).
This needs to be fixed in the openSUSE:Factory:ARM configuration: $ osc meta prj openSUSE:Factory:ARM ... <repository name="standard" rebuild="local" linkedbuild="all"> <path project="openSUSE:Factory" repository="ports"/> <arch>aarch64</arch> <arch>armv7l</arch> <arch>armv6l</arch> <arch>x86_64</arch> </repository> ...
Also I find it rather confusing that the master branch is being updated to a stable kernel rather than doing that on the stable branch only, given that v3.17-rc1 was tagged the day before the update to v3.16.1. It results in a non-linear history wrt upstream git.
This has been this way for some time, so as not to submit an -rc1 to Factory. But now that the 'stable' branch is used for Factory, we might change it. But I'm not doing the version updates, so I don't know how difficult it is :). Jeff, what do you think? Thanks, Michal -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org