Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   ArchLinux Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/archlinux-development/)
-   -   kernel-2.6.27-lts possible changes? (http://www.linux-archive.org/archlinux-development/296414-kernel-2-6-27-lts-possible-changes.html)

Tobias Powalowski 12-16-2009 08:10 PM

kernel-2.6.27-lts possible changes?
 
Hi guys,
just looked at kernel26-lts PKGBUILD and config files.

I have locally modified it to also split the headers out from standard
package, as the stock kernel PKGBUILD does.

- Adding xen pvops would make sense on a so called server kernel.
http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps
I can't test this myself but according to the link above i guess it's safe to
enable it. It's now also enabled in .32 kernel 64 bit kernel.

- Since the last pkgver it is possible now to build binary modules against
the lts kernel, without the need of rebuilding them on every small bump.
Imho it would make sense to provide the same binary modules for this kernel as
we do for the stock kernel.

Do you have any other thoughts or objections?

If i get some input from you and you agree to the above, i could put this
stuff tomorrow to testing repository.

greetings
tpowa
--
Tobias Powalowski
Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa)
http://www.archlinux.org
tpowa@archlinux.org

Tobias Powalowski 12-17-2009 12:00 PM

kernel-2.6.27-lts possible changes?
 
Am Mittwoch 16 Dezember 2009 schrieb Tobias Powalowski:
> Hi guys,
> just looked at kernel26-lts PKGBUILD and config files.
>
> I have locally modified it to also split the headers out from standard
> package, as the stock kernel PKGBUILD does.
>
> - Adding xen pvops would make sense on a so called server kernel.
> http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps
> I can't test this myself but according to the link above i guess it's safe
> to enable it. It's now also enabled in .32 kernel 64 bit kernel.
>
> - Since the last pkgver it is possible now to build binary modules against
> the lts kernel, without the need of rebuilding them on every small bump.
> Imho it would make sense to provide the same binary modules for this kernel
> as we do for the stock kernel.
>
> Do you have any other thoughts or objections?
>
> If i get some input from you and you agree to the above, i could put this
> stuff tomorrow to testing repository.
>
> greetings
> tpowa
>
Anyone?

--
Tobias Powalowski
Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa)
http://www.archlinux.org
tpowa@archlinux.org

Aaron Griffin 12-18-2009 04:41 PM

kernel-2.6.27-lts possible changes?
 
On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Tobias Powalowski <t.powa@gmx.de> wrote:
> Am Mittwoch 16 Dezember 2009 schrieb Tobias Powalowski:
>> Hi guys,
>> just looked at kernel26-lts PKGBUILD and config files.
>>
>> I have locally modified it to also split the headers out from standard
>> package, as the stock kernel PKGBUILD does.
>>
>> - Adding xen pvops would make sense on a so called server kernel.
>> * http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps
>> I can't test this myself but according to the link above i guess it's safe
>> *to enable it. It's now also enabled in .32 kernel 64 bit kernel.
>>
>> - Since the last pkgver it is possible now to build binary modules against
>> * *the lts kernel, without the need of rebuilding them on every small bump.
>> Imho it would make sense to provide the same binary modules for this kernel
>> *as we do for the stock kernel.
>>
>> Do you have any other thoughts or objections?
>>
>> If i get some input from you and you agree to the above, i could put this
>> stuff tomorrow to testing repository.
>>
>> greetings
>> tpowa
>>
> Anyone?

Hmm, I don't use the lts kernel, so I can't really answer, but it
seems ok to enable the pvops stuff.

Regarding shipping modules, I think that's a very good idea, but it's more work

Tobias Powalowski 12-18-2009 06:24 PM

kernel-2.6.27-lts possible changes?
 
Am Freitag 18 Dezember 2009 schrieb Aaron Griffin:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 7:00 AM, Tobias Powalowski <t.powa@gmx.de> wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch 16 Dezember 2009 schrieb Tobias Powalowski:
> >> Hi guys,
> >> just looked at kernel26-lts PKGBUILD and config files.
> >>
> >> I have locally modified it to also split the headers out from standard
> >> package, as the stock kernel PKGBUILD does.
> >>
> >> - Adding xen pvops would make sense on a so called server kernel.
> >> http://wiki.xensource.com/xenwiki/XenParavirtOps
> >> I can't test this myself but according to the link above i guess it's
> >> safe to enable it. It's now also enabled in .32 kernel 64 bit kernel.
> >>
> >> - Since the last pkgver it is possible now to build binary modules
> >> against the lts kernel, without the need of rebuilding them on every
> >> small bump. Imho it would make sense to provide the same binary modules
> >> for this kernel as we do for the stock kernel.
> >>
> >> Do you have any other thoughts or objections?
> >>
> >> If i get some input from you and you agree to the above, i could put
> >> this stuff tomorrow to testing repository.
> >>
> >> greetings
> >> tpowa
> >
> > Anyone?
>
> Hmm, I don't use the lts kernel, so I can't really answer, but it
> seems ok to enable the pvops stuff.
>
> Regarding shipping modules, I think that's a very good idea, but it's more
> work
>
Well modules only needs to be rebuild on update, which happens rarely.
Nvidia drivers bump relativly often, but the others are not bumping every one
or 2 months.

greetings
tpowa
--
Tobias Powalowski
Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa)
http://www.archlinux.org
tpowa@archlinux.org


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:32 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.