[opensuse-kernel] Frequency of Leap kernel updates
Hi, as we're closing to the release of Leap 42.3, I'd like to ask your opinions about the frequency of update kernel releases. For Leap 42.1 and 42.2, I've tried to pick up the update regularly, roughly once per month. For example, below is the list of kernels that have been released for Leap 42.2: 4.4.27-1 20161027 4.4.36-5 * 20161208 4.4.36-8 20161209 4.4.46-11 20170204 4.4.49-16 * 20170219 4.4.57-18.3 * 20170330 4.4.62-18.6 20170421 4.4.70-18.9 20170531 4.4.72-18.12 * 20170619 4.4.73-18.17 20170623 4.4.74-18.20 20170630 The kernels with asterisk are for security updates. My question here is whether this rhythm is ideal for users and from maintenance burden POV. Should the update be triggered more often, a la rolling release like each stable 4.4.x kernel update? Or twice per month? Or better to be less frequently? Release more often would allow catching a regression more quickly, and this would make bug hunting easier. More frequent update is no problem from my kernel branch maintainer side, too, but it'll certainly increase the load for QA. Comments? thanks, Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
What is the frequency of kernel updates in SLE? Can we use that same frequency and the same updates? On 12 July 2017 at 17:57, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
Hi,
as we're closing to the release of Leap 42.3, I'd like to ask your opinions about the frequency of update kernel releases.
For Leap 42.1 and 42.2, I've tried to pick up the update regularly, roughly once per month. For example, below is the list of kernels that have been released for Leap 42.2:
4.4.27-1 20161027 4.4.36-5 * 20161208 4.4.36-8 20161209 4.4.46-11 20170204 4.4.49-16 * 20170219 4.4.57-18.3 * 20170330 4.4.62-18.6 20170421 4.4.70-18.9 20170531 4.4.72-18.12 * 20170619 4.4.73-18.17 20170623 4.4.74-18.20 20170630
The kernels with asterisk are for security updates.
My question here is whether this rhythm is ideal for users and from maintenance burden POV. Should the update be triggered more often, a la rolling release like each stable 4.4.x kernel update? Or twice per month? Or better to be less frequently?
Release more often would allow catching a regression more quickly, and this would make bug hunting easier. More frequent update is no problem from my kernel branch maintainer side, too, but it'll certainly increase the load for QA.
Comments?
thanks,
Takashi
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:02:55 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
What is the frequency of kernel updates in SLE?
It's roughly once per two months.
Can we use that same frequency and the same updates?
We can, and it means less frequent updates. Also, we have slightly different policies about the security updates between Leap and SLE. For SLE, a fast-path update is based on the previous released kernel while we just take the full updates at the moment on Leap. Takashi
On 12 July 2017 at 17:57, Takashi Iwai <tiwai@suse.de> wrote:
Hi,
as we're closing to the release of Leap 42.3, I'd like to ask your opinions about the frequency of update kernel releases.
For Leap 42.1 and 42.2, I've tried to pick up the update regularly, roughly once per month. For example, below is the list of kernels that have been released for Leap 42.2:
4.4.27-1 20161027 4.4.36-5 * 20161208 4.4.36-8 20161209 4.4.46-11 20170204 4.4.49-16 * 20170219 4.4.57-18.3 * 20170330 4.4.62-18.6 20170421 4.4.70-18.9 20170531 4.4.72-18.12 * 20170619 4.4.73-18.17 20170623 4.4.74-18.20 20170630
The kernels with asterisk are for security updates.
My question here is whether this rhythm is ideal for users and from maintenance burden POV. Should the update be triggered more often, a la rolling release like each stable 4.4.x kernel update? Or twice per month? Or better to be less frequently?
Release more often would allow catching a regression more quickly, and this would make bug hunting easier. More frequent update is no problem from my kernel branch maintainer side, too, but it'll certainly increase the load for QA.
Comments?
thanks,
Takashi
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:02:55 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
What is the frequency of kernel updates in SLE?
It's roughly once per two months.
Can we use that same frequency and the same updates?
We can, and it means less frequent updates.
Also, we have slightly different policies about the security updates between Leap and SLE. For SLE, a fast-path update is based on the previous released kernel while we just take the full updates at the moment on Leap.
If in doubt do what SLE does unless there's an advantage of doing it differently. For non kernel maintainers the kernel is confusing so reducing the number of different sources levels floating around is beneficial I think :-) cu Ludwig -- (o_ Ludwig Nussel //\ V_/_ http://www.suse.com/ SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 15:13:54 +0200, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:02:55 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
What is the frequency of kernel updates in SLE?
It's roughly once per two months.
Can we use that same frequency and the same updates?
We can, and it means less frequent updates.
Also, we have slightly different policies about the security updates between Leap and SLE. For SLE, a fast-path update is based on the previous released kernel while we just take the full updates at the moment on Leap.
If in doubt do what SLE does unless there's an advantage of doing it differently.
The obvious advantage is that you get the fix more quickly than SLE. For SLE customers, we provide official PTF per request via L3, but it's not the case for openSUSE.
For non kernel maintainers the kernel is confusing so reducing the number of different sources levels floating around is beneficial I think :-)
It just slows down the update releases, but the sources remain different between SLE and Leap, so it doesn't help reducing your confusion in this regard, unfortunately :) Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On jeudi, 13 juillet 2017 16.04:16 h CEST Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 15:13:54 +0200,
Ludwig Nussel wrote:
Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 18:02:55 +0200,
Richard Brown wrote:
What is the frequency of kernel updates in SLE?
It's roughly once per two months.
Can we use that same frequency and the same updates?
We can, and it means less frequent updates.
Also, we have slightly different policies about the security updates between Leap and SLE. For SLE, a fast-path update is based on the previous released kernel while we just take the full updates at the moment on Leap.
If in doubt do what SLE does unless there's an advantage of doing it differently.
The obvious advantage is that you get the fix more quickly than SLE. For SLE customers, we provide official PTF per request via L3, but it's not the case for openSUSE.
For non kernel maintainers the kernel is confusing so reducing the number of different sources levels floating around is beneficial I think :-)
It just slows down the update releases, but the sources remain different between SLE and Leap, so it doesn't help reducing your confusion in this regard, unfortunately :)
Takashi
On a «commercial and advertising side» getting frequent update which contain security fixes and bug fixes on time (most of the time quickly than the others) is also an advantage ;-) -- Bruno Friedmann Ioda-Net Sàrl www.ioda-net.ch Bareos Partner, openSUSE Member, fsfe fellowship GPG KEY : D5C9B751C4653227 irc: tigerfoot -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
Hallo Ludwig, On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 15:13:54 +0200, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
(...) For non kernel maintainers the kernel is confusing so reducing the number of different sources levels floating around is beneficial I think :-)
Huh. For non gnome maintainers, gnome is confusing. For non KDE maintainers, KDE is confusing. For non firefox maintainers, firefox is confusing. For non samba maintainers, samba is confusing. For non X11 maintainers, X11 is confusing. For non git maintainers, git is confusing. For non bash maintainers, bash is confusing. And I could go on. What an argument is that, seriously? Every non-trivial piece of software has the potential to confuse people one way or another. What does it have to do with how frequently updates should be released? And it was not even Friday! ;-) Takashi, my own recommendation: if nobody complained about what you were doing so far, then it must be right, stick to it, unless YOU think there's a problem with it. -- Jean Delvare SUSE L3 Support -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On 6 September 2017 at 14:55, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> wrote:
Hallo Ludwig,
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 15:13:54 +0200, Ludwig Nussel wrote:
(...) For non kernel maintainers the kernel is confusing so reducing the number of different sources levels floating around is beneficial I think :-)
Huh.
For non gnome maintainers, gnome is confusing.
And yet, we do not have different variants of gnome between Leap and SLE
For non KDE maintainers, KDE is confusing.
And yet, we do not have different variants of KDE between Leap and PackageHub
For non firefox maintainers, firefox is confusing.
For non samba maintainers, samba is confusing.
For non X11 maintainers, X11 is confusing.
For non git maintainers, git is confusing.
For non bash maintainers, bash is confusing.
And I could go on.
And yet... ;) I could go on too, but I will not
What an argument is that, seriously? Every non-trivial piece of software has the potential to confuse people one way or another. What does it have to do with how frequently updates should be released?
And it was not even Friday! ;-)
It's the argument of the Leap release manager, who has a formal responsibility to encourage alignment between SLE and Leap - after all, every time something diverges it causes more work, for him.
Takashi, my own recommendation: if nobody complained about what you were doing so far, then it must be right, stick to it, unless YOU think there's a problem with it.
Takashi, my own recommendation is to favour reducing your work and the variance between the Leap Kernel and the SLE Kernel as much as possible. But I, like the rest of the community, obviously trust you if you think the additional work is justified. My only additional stipulation as Chairman would be to add that the communities expectation is that the Leap kernel is as reliable as, and is 'broadly compatible' with, the SLE kernel. Hence my original reply to this thread, which suggests mimicking whatever is being done in SLE. Regards, Richard Brown openSUSE Chairman SUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, 06 Sep 2017 15:53:14 +0200, Richard Brown wrote:
On 6 September 2017 at 14:55, Jean Delvare <jdelvare@suse.de> wrote:
Takashi, my own recommendation: if nobody complained about what you were doing so far, then it must be right, stick to it, unless YOU think there's a problem with it.
Takashi, my own recommendation is to favour reducing your work and the variance between the Leap Kernel and the SLE Kernel as much as possible. But I, like the rest of the community, obviously trust you if you think the additional work is justified.
Thanks both of you, I decided to keep the current scheme, as there is no obvious problem with it, so far. That is, Leap gets slightly more frequent updates than SLE, but the release is aligned. It's good for both sides (users on Leap can get fixes more quickly, and SLE can get more test coverage).
My only additional stipulation as Chairman would be to add that the communities expectation is that the Leap kernel is as reliable as, and is 'broadly compatible' with, the SLE kernel. Hence my original reply to this thread, which suggests mimicking whatever is being done in SLE.
That's always OK with Leap kernel, as we share the very same code as SLE kernel. Generally speaking, they are "fully compatible" in the source code level. The major difference is the kernel config, e.g. Leap supports more drivers than SLE. Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On 2017-07-12 17:57, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Hi,
as we're closing to the release of Leap 42.3, I'd like to ask your opinions about the frequency of update kernel releases.
I'll comment from my point of view as user. But it is two views, actually. For my desktop/laptop machines, frequent updates are not a problem; but for my machines doing server duty a reboot is more of a problem. Thus, my opinion is that we could have frequent updates (once per month, say), but clearly indicate when the update is for security issues, and which we can skip or delay safely. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 09:48:28PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2017-07-12 17:57, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Hi,
as we're closing to the release of Leap 42.3, I'd like to ask your opinions about the frequency of update kernel releases.
I'll comment from my point of view as user. But it is two views, actually. For my desktop/laptop machines, frequent updates are not a problem; but for my machines doing server duty a reboot is more of a problem.
Thus, my opinion is that we could have frequent updates (once per month, say), but clearly indicate when the update is for security issues, and which we can skip or delay safely.
We are constantly getting kernel security issues, so pretty much every kernel update has security issues fixed. OTherwise the type of the update would be "recommended" and not "security" though. Ciao, Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 22:31:13 +0200, Marcus Meissner wrote:
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 09:48:28PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2017-07-12 17:57, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Hi,
as we're closing to the release of Leap 42.3, I'd like to ask your opinions about the frequency of update kernel releases.
I'll comment from my point of view as user. But it is two views, actually. For my desktop/laptop machines, frequent updates are not a problem; but for my machines doing server duty a reboot is more of a problem.
Thus, my opinion is that we could have frequent updates (once per month, say), but clearly indicate when the update is for security issues, and which we can skip or delay safely.
We are constantly getting kernel security issues, so pretty much every kernel update has security issues fixed.
OTherwise the type of the update would be "recommended" and not "security" though.
Right. Maybe my listing was misleading: the releases with asterisk were for severe security updates (aka fast-path update for SLE). All other regular updates contain either security fixes, too, or the regression-fix releases. Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On 2017-07-12 22:47, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 22:31:13 +0200, Marcus Meissner wrote:
On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 09:48:28PM +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2017-07-12 17:57, Takashi Iwai wrote:
Hi,
as we're closing to the release of Leap 42.3, I'd like to ask your opinions about the frequency of update kernel releases.
I'll comment from my point of view as user. But it is two views, actually. For my desktop/laptop machines, frequent updates are not a problem; but for my machines doing server duty a reboot is more of a problem.
Thus, my opinion is that we could have frequent updates (once per month, say), but clearly indicate when the update is for security issues, and which we can skip or delay safely.
We are constantly getting kernel security issues, so pretty much every kernel update has security issues fixed.
OTherwise the type of the update would be "recommended" and not "security" though.
Right. Maybe my listing was misleading: the releases with asterisk were for severe security updates (aka fast-path update for SLE). All other regular updates contain either security fixes, too, or the regression-fix releases.
Well, knowing at the time if it is a severe security update or not is important. It makes easier to decide whether to update or not. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)
Hi, Am 12.07.2017 um 17:57 schrieb Takashi Iwai:
as we're closing to the release of Leap 42.3, I'd like to ask your opinions about the frequency of update kernel releases.
Just to be clear, you are talking about maintenance submissions to openSUSE:Leap:42.3:Update? Kernel:openSUSE-42.3 could offer a different level of update frequency if needed. Regards, Andreas -- SUSE Linux GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 16:43:37 +0200, Andreas F4rber wrote:
Hi,
Am 12.07.2017 um 17:57 schrieb Takashi Iwai:
as we're closing to the release of Leap 42.3, I'd like to ask your opinions about the frequency of update kernel releases.
Just to be clear, you are talking about maintenance submissions to openSUSE:Leap:42.3:Update?
Yes.
Kernel:openSUSE-42.3 could offer a different level of update frequency if needed.
It's updated daily. And my question is rather the part "if needed". Are more frequent updates preferred? Or better less updates than now? Or is it good in the current pace? Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On 7/13/17 7:52 AM, Takashi Iwai wrote:
And my question is rather the part "if needed". Are more frequent updates preferred? Or better less updates than now? Or is it good in the current pace?
Of course, you'll get different answers. Opensuse installs here use 3 tiers of Kernel usage (1) opensuse Leap 42.x RELEASE/update (2) DIY builds of current LTS Kernel (3) Kernel:Stable -- preferred from repo, or DIY, as needed 'Boring' desktops & non-demanding servers, use (1). Update frequency is really not a concern; consuming timely security updates is. (2) is becoming more frequently used, particularly with increases in usage of EFI, BTRFS, and modern video cards. (3) is used on all high-volume & modern Xen production instances (not just Opensuse). I'd prefer to see more dependence on project's OBS builds, but they're too frequently non-functional for days/weeks at a time (e.g., now). DIY builds are more reliable. Ironically, this is the least 'supported' Leap config. For (2) & (3), update frequency tracks approximately <= 1/wk, or @ critical security/functional updates. Not an issue here, as all externally facing servers are mirrored/load-balanced, and we stagger updates. Bottom line -- 'pace' is simply not the issue here. Predictable reliability -- Up-to-date and functional -- is what I look for. Personally, I'd tweak the 'pace' to fit available resources, once keeping up with security updates is accounted for. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 04:52:49PM +0200, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 16:43:37 +0200, Andreas F4rber wrote:
Hi,
Am 12.07.2017 um 17:57 schrieb Takashi Iwai:
as we're closing to the release of Leap 42.3, I'd like to ask your opinions about the frequency of update kernel releases.
Just to be clear, you are talking about maintenance submissions to openSUSE:Leap:42.3:Update?
Yes.
Kernel:openSUSE-42.3 could offer a different level of update frequency if needed.
It's updated daily.
And my question is rather the part "if needed". Are more frequent updates preferred? Or better less updates than now? Or is it good in the current pace?
For me on the coordination side the current rate is OK. I do not want them weekly. Ciao, Marcus -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On 2017-07-13 16:52, Takashi Iwai wrote:
And my question is rather the part "if needed". Are more frequent updates preferred? Or better less updates than now? Or is it good in the current pace?
For me the current status is fine. The only nag is easily knowing which are important security updates, and which not and I can thus delay the install. Ie, update ASAP or when convenient. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 19:33:53 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2017-07-13 16:52, Takashi Iwai wrote:
And my question is rather the part "if needed". Are more frequent updates preferred? Or better less updates than now? Or is it good in the current pace?
For me the current status is fine.
The only nag is easily knowing which are important security updates, and which not and I can thus delay the install. Ie, update ASAP or when convenient.
This sounds rather like a question to the maintenance team. I thought we already have some tags and classifications? Takashi -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-kernel+owner@opensuse.org
On 2017-07-13 19:40, Takashi Iwai wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jul 2017 19:33:53 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2017-07-13 16:52, Takashi Iwai wrote:
And my question is rather the part "if needed". Are more frequent updates preferred? Or better less updates than now? Or is it good in the current pace?
For me the current status is fine.
The only nag is easily knowing which are important security updates, and which not and I can thus delay the install. Ie, update ASAP or when convenient.
This sounds rather like a question to the maintenance team. I thought we already have some tags and classifications?
There is an email sent to the security announce mail list, but it is not that simple to interpret. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 42.2 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar)
participants (9)
-
Andreas Färber -
Bruno Friedmann -
Carlos E. R. -
Jean Delvare -
Ludwig Nussel -
Marcus Meissner -
PGNet Dev -
Richard Brown -
Takashi Iwai