Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-factory (753 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-factory] Re: [opensuse-kernel] Tumbleweed kernel changes to help upstream development
  • From: "M. Edward (Ed) Borasky" <znmeb@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 09:40:57 -0700
  • Message-id: <>
On Mon, Aug 27, 2012 at 10:15 PM, Andrew Wafaa <awafaa@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 28 August 2012 06:05, Greg KH <gregkh@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi all,

As part of one of the Linux kernel Summit discussions today, it was
brought up that after a kernel is released (for example 3.5), it's a bit
too late to be doing testing to see how well it is working out. The .0
release is usually a bit rough, and it takes until the .1 or .2 release
to get most major issues out of the way.

So, the kernel developers would like to get a wider range of testing,
and one thing proposed would be to have rolling distros switch their
kernel over a bit earlier to the new release than they had been doing.
Specifically, around the -rc5 point in time would be great. That way,
any reported regressions could be fixed sooner and get into the final .0
release for everyone to use.

Now this does place a bit of a larger burden on the users of those
distros to be diligent in reporting problems, and the distro engineers
to report the issues upstream as well, but it sounds like a reasonable
thing to try out.

So, for the next kernel release, I'm thinking of switching the kernel in
Tumbleweed over to 3.6 at the -rc5 timeframe. Does anyone strongly
object to this happening?

I don't see any issue with switching earlier, other than finding some
bugs sooner :-) Most people that run Tumbleweed are generally living
on the edge of their seats so should be more than capable of reporting
bugs. I find you proposal sane (well as sane as anything is), and as
such should be implemented.



Andrew Wafaa
IRC: FunkyPenguin
GPG: 0x3A36312F
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

As a long-time "edge of the seats" Linux desktop/laptop user (I
started at Red Hat 6.2 and ran Gentoo testing for years) I'm going to
disagree. A rolling release is fine for anything *but* the kernel. As
far as I'm concerned, the boot loader, kernel, filesystem checks, X
windows, networking / wifi, sound cards, etc. - everything that does
its magic up to the point where the display manager asks me to log in
- needs to be stable and signed off on by some kind of human / machine
QA process.

I'd like to see some kernel software metrics - bug finding rates /
reporting rates / closing rates, average number of days between the
last kernel release candidate and stable, etc. I'm fine with GNOME,
KDE, Firefox, LibreOffice rolling releases. Hell, I run most of my
scientific applications and eBook publishing tools compiled from
upstream tarballs and some things even from version control
repositories! But the kernel - no! Once I have filesystems, network,
audio and video working I don't want to be part of the troubleshooting
efforts on them again.

Twitter:; Computational Journalism Publishers

How the Hell can the lion sleep with all those people singing "A weem
oh way!" at the top of their lungs?
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@xxxxxxxxxxxx

< Previous Next >