FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > ArchLinux > ArchLinux Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-24-2010, 06:55 AM
Aaron Griffin
 
Default LTS install ISOs (was: makechrootpkg without aufs2)

On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 1:50 AM, Tobias Powalowski <t.powa@gmx.de> wrote:
> Am Sonntag 24 Januar 2010 schrieb Aaron Griffin:
>> On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 1:38 AM, Tobias Powalowski <t.powa@gmx.de> wrote:
>> > When this change happens, shall we drop the aufs patch too from kernel?
>> > I don't use it at all.
>>
>> Not just yet, the ISOs use aufs, and there's no real good system to replace
>> *that
>>
> Ok, just an other thing,
> shall i add aufs patch to the lts kernel if we bump it to .32?
> Just in case to be able to provide lts install isos.

Hmmm. LTS install ISOs is an interesting idea, but not sure how people
feel about that. I mean, the kernel for the install ISO is just the
running kernel. You can still install the LTS kernel from a non-LTS
ISO.

Does anyone have a strong opinion on this?
 
Old 01-24-2010, 01:10 PM
Tobias Powalowski
 
Default LTS install ISOs (was: makechrootpkg without aufs2)

Am Sonntag 24 Januar 2010 schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:
> On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 13:07:28 +0200
>
> Ionut Biru <biru.ionut@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 01/24/2010 09:55 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> > > Hmmm. LTS install ISOs is an interesting idea, but not sure how
> > > people feel about that. I mean, the kernel for the install ISO is
> > > just the running kernel. You can still install the LTS kernel from
> > > a non-LTS ISO.
> > >
> > > Does anyone have a strong opinion on this?
> >
> > i don't see any reason to have that.
>
> what's the purpose of the LTS kernel again? it's basically to make
> kernel update cycles of your system longer, right? so instead of
> getting a new major version every 3 months, you jump from LTS to LTS.
>
> I can see why some people want that on their installed box [and hence
> the possibility to install it using any installation medium].
>
> our goal with the installation media (we're failing at that goal
> right now), is to have a set of media for each new kernel release. why?
> optimal hardware support. so the question is simple: do LTS kernels get
> driver updates like the normal kernels do? but even if they do, they
> probably run behind on filesystems support and such.
>
> so i do not see any advantages for installation media running an LTS
> kernel.
>
> Dieter
>
The lts is generally optimized for server usage,
only bugfixes go into the lts line, no new drivers will be supported.
When we move to .32 i plan also to provide binary modules for it.

Perhaps it's interesting for some people, i recently added support for lts
installation and booting in archboot scripts, that was the reason for asking
if normal installation media wants also support this option.

greetings
tpowa
--
Tobias Powalowski
Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa)
http://www.archlinux.org
tpowa@archlinux.org
 
Old 02-02-2010, 05:30 AM
Tobias Powalowski
 
Default LTS install ISOs (was: makechrootpkg without aufs2)

Am Sonntag 24 Januar 2010 schrieb Tobias Powalowski:
> Am Sonntag 24 Januar 2010 schrieb Dieter Plaetinck:
> > On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 13:07:28 +0200
> >
> > Ionut Biru <biru.ionut@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On 01/24/2010 09:55 AM, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> > > > Hmmm. LTS install ISOs is an interesting idea, but not sure how
> > > > people feel about that. I mean, the kernel for the install ISO is
> > > > just the running kernel. You can still install the LTS kernel from
> > > > a non-LTS ISO.
> > > >
> > > > Does anyone have a strong opinion on this?
> > >
> > > i don't see any reason to have that.
> >
> > what's the purpose of the LTS kernel again? it's basically to make
> > kernel update cycles of your system longer, right? so instead of
> > getting a new major version every 3 months, you jump from LTS to LTS.
> >
> > I can see why some people want that on their installed box [and hence
> > the possibility to install it using any installation medium].
> >
> > our goal with the installation media (we're failing at that goal
> > right now), is to have a set of media for each new kernel release. why?
> > optimal hardware support. so the question is simple: do LTS kernels get
> > driver updates like the normal kernels do? but even if they do, they
> > probably run behind on filesystems support and such.
> >
> > so i do not see any advantages for installation media running an LTS
> > kernel.
> >
> > Dieter
>
> The lts is generally optimized for server usage,
> only bugfixes go into the lts line, no new drivers will be supported.
> When we move to .32 i plan also to provide binary modules for it.
>
> Perhaps it's interesting for some people, i recently added support for lts
> installation and booting in archboot scripts, that was the reason for
> asking if normal installation media wants also support this option.
>
> greetings
> tpowa
Ok seems no real interest here, so aufs patch will not be needed in .32 lts.

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

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:16 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org