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 > Debian > Debian Kernel

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 12-22-2009, 05:39 PM
Kurt Roeckx
 
Default Bits from the kernel team

On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 04:50:22PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 17:22 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Now that we have a 2.6.32 kernel in unstable, can you updates us
> > on the various things mentioned in this mail?
> >
> > For instance, as I understand it, most other distro's recently
> > had a release with a 2.6.31 kernel?
>
> Fedora 12, Ubuntu 9.10 and openSUSE 11.2 have this kernel version.
>
> > Do you know if there are
> > plans to have a kernel with backported drivers, one used by
> > multiple distributions?
>
> I've not heard of a general plan for that. However there is a
> compat-wireless project (covering Wifi and Bluetooth drivers) that I
> think Fedora and Ubuntu are pulling from. That might be something we
> should do too.

For etch we had an Etch-And-A-Half kernel to add support for new
hardware. Which also meant we had to upgrade some things because
the kernel has the habbit of breaking things. I don't know if
there are simular plans for lenny?

Anyway what I would really like to see is a kernel that adds
support for more hardware and fixes bugs without any other changes.
I believe that 2.6.16.x was supposed to do that, but in the end
only contained bug fixes. And they now seem to have various
versions for which they fix bugs. But this doesn't solve our
problem that by the time we release our kernel is probably
outdated already for new hardware. And this is about more than
just wifi and bluetooth.

I was hoping that various distributions could work together to
have long time support for 1 kernel version that adds new hardware
support. Where that would be atleast some time after squeeze+1 is
released. Since the other distro's used a 2.6.31 kernel recently,
and we seem to be going for 2.6.32(?), it seems unlikely that we
can get all to work on 1 such kernel version. But maybe we should
look at what the "enterprise" versions will be using instead?


Kurt


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-22-2009, 05:39 PM
Kurt Roeckx
 
Default Bits from the kernel team

On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 04:50:22PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 17:22 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Now that we have a 2.6.32 kernel in unstable, can you updates us
> > on the various things mentioned in this mail?
> >
> > For instance, as I understand it, most other distro's recently
> > had a release with a 2.6.31 kernel?
>
> Fedora 12, Ubuntu 9.10 and openSUSE 11.2 have this kernel version.
>
> > Do you know if there are
> > plans to have a kernel with backported drivers, one used by
> > multiple distributions?
>
> I've not heard of a general plan for that. However there is a
> compat-wireless project (covering Wifi and Bluetooth drivers) that I
> think Fedora and Ubuntu are pulling from. That might be something we
> should do too.

For etch we had an Etch-And-A-Half kernel to add support for new
hardware. Which also meant we had to upgrade some things because
the kernel has the habbit of breaking things. I don't know if
there are simular plans for lenny?

Anyway what I would really like to see is a kernel that adds
support for more hardware and fixes bugs without any other changes.
I believe that 2.6.16.x was supposed to do that, but in the end
only contained bug fixes. And they now seem to have various
versions for which they fix bugs. But this doesn't solve our
problem that by the time we release our kernel is probably
outdated already for new hardware. And this is about more than
just wifi and bluetooth.

I was hoping that various distributions could work together to
have long time support for 1 kernel version that adds new hardware
support. Where that would be atleast some time after squeeze+1 is
released. Since the other distro's used a 2.6.31 kernel recently,
and we seem to be going for 2.6.32(?), it seems unlikely that we
can get all to work on 1 such kernel version. But maybe we should
look at what the "enterprise" versions will be using instead?


Kurt


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-22-2009, 06:01 PM
Steve Langasek
 
Default Bits from the kernel team

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 07:39:22PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 04:50:22PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 17:22 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:

> > Fedora 12, Ubuntu 9.10 and openSUSE 11.2 have this kernel version.

> I was hoping that various distributions could work together to
> have long time support for 1 kernel version that adds new hardware
> support. Where that would be atleast some time after squeeze+1 is
> released. Since the other distro's used a 2.6.31 kernel recently,
> and we seem to be going for 2.6.32(?), it seems unlikely that we
> can get all to work on 1 such kernel version. But maybe we should
> look at what the "enterprise" versions will be using instead?

Fedora and Ubuntu both do 6-monthly releases, and are certainly not
supported for a "long time" by Debian standards.

Ubuntu 10.04 LTS and RHEL 6 are both expected in the first half of 2010[1].
Ubuntu 10.04 LTS will be shipping 2.6.32, and my understanding (based on
discussions at LPC) is that RHEL 6 will as well; and 2.6.32 will have
extended upstream support, including support for new hardware.

So this look at the "enterprise" versions was already done, and is what
resulted in picking 2.6.32.

--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org

[1] http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Red-Hat-Summit-videos-presentations-and-outlook-for-RHEL6-743323.html
 
Old 12-22-2009, 06:01 PM
Steve Langasek
 
Default Bits from the kernel team

On Tue, Dec 22, 2009 at 07:39:22PM +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 04:50:22PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 17:22 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:

> > Fedora 12, Ubuntu 9.10 and openSUSE 11.2 have this kernel version.

> I was hoping that various distributions could work together to
> have long time support for 1 kernel version that adds new hardware
> support. Where that would be atleast some time after squeeze+1 is
> released. Since the other distro's used a 2.6.31 kernel recently,
> and we seem to be going for 2.6.32(?), it seems unlikely that we
> can get all to work on 1 such kernel version. But maybe we should
> look at what the "enterprise" versions will be using instead?

Fedora and Ubuntu both do 6-monthly releases, and are certainly not
supported for a "long time" by Debian standards.

Ubuntu 10.04 LTS and RHEL 6 are both expected in the first half of 2010[1].
Ubuntu 10.04 LTS will be shipping 2.6.32, and my understanding (based on
discussions at LPC) is that RHEL 6 will as well; and 2.6.32 will have
extended upstream support, including support for new hardware.

So this look at the "enterprise" versions was already done, and is what
resulted in picking 2.6.32.

--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org

[1] http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Red-Hat-Summit-videos-presentations-and-outlook-for-RHEL6-743323.html
 
Old 12-22-2009, 06:33 PM
Julien Cristau
 
Default Bits from the kernel team

On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 16:50:22 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:

> > > The X packages will be able to use modprobe
> > > config files to enable KMS at run time as required.
>
> This is not for the kernel team to do.
>
FWIW, this is done for intel in experimental, probably soon in unstable.
For radeon the decision whether to enable kernel mode setting by default
for squeeze is still to be made.

Cheers,
Julien


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-22-2009, 06:33 PM
Julien Cristau
 
Default Bits from the kernel team

On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 16:50:22 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:

> > > The X packages will be able to use modprobe
> > > config files to enable KMS at run time as required.
>
> This is not for the kernel team to do.
>
FWIW, this is done for intel in experimental, probably soon in unstable.
For radeon the decision whether to enable kernel mode setting by default
for squeeze is still to be made.

Cheers,
Julien


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-22-2009, 11:13 PM
Ben Hutchings
 
Default Bits from the kernel team

On Tue, 2009-12-22 at 19:39 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 04:50:22PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 17:22 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Now that we have a 2.6.32 kernel in unstable, can you updates us
> > > on the various things mentioned in this mail?
> > >
> > > For instance, as I understand it, most other distro's recently
> > > had a release with a 2.6.31 kernel?
> >
> > Fedora 12, Ubuntu 9.10 and openSUSE 11.2 have this kernel version.
> >
> > > Do you know if there are
> > > plans to have a kernel with backported drivers, one used by
> > > multiple distributions?
> >
> > I've not heard of a general plan for that. However there is a
> > compat-wireless project (covering Wifi and Bluetooth drivers) that I
> > think Fedora and Ubuntu are pulling from. That might be something we
> > should do too.
>
> For etch we had an Etch-And-A-Half kernel to add support for new
> hardware. Which also meant we had to upgrade some things because
> the kernel has the habbit of breaking things. I don't know if
> there are simular plans for lenny?

No, this would have had to be planned for in the middle of this year,
but then we were told squeeze would freeze in December.

Currently you can install kernel images from unstable or backports
without any extra dependencies. I'm not aware of any significant
breakage though some packages may rely on deprecated and removed stuff
in procfs or sysfs.

> Anyway what I would really like to see is a kernel that adds
> support for more hardware and fixes bugs without any other changes.

We already do backport new hardware support in response to specific
requests.

> I believe that 2.6.16.x was supposed to do that, but in the end
> only contained bug fixes. And they now seem to have various
> versions for which they fix bugs.

Right, and 2.6.32 will be one of them.

> But this doesn't solve our
> problem that by the time we release our kernel is probably
> outdated already for new hardware. And this is about more than
> just wifi and bluetooth.
>
> I was hoping that various distributions could work together to
> have long time support for 1 kernel version that adds new hardware
> support. Where that would be atleast some time after squeeze+1 is
> released. Since the other distro's used a 2.6.31 kernel recently,
> and we seem to be going for 2.6.32(?), it seems unlikely that we
> can get all to work on 1 such kernel version.

We talked to the Ubuntu kernel team and the plan is that Ubuntu 10.04
LTS will also use 2.6.32.

> But maybe we should look at what the "enterprise" versions will be
> using instead?

RHEL 6 is due real soon now. I hope they will also go with 2.6.32, but
RH is keeping very quiet about such specifics. SLE 11 is not that old
so I don't expect SUSE will use this version.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Experience is what causes a person to make new mistakes instead of old ones.
 
Old 12-22-2009, 11:13 PM
Ben Hutchings
 
Default Bits from the kernel team

On Tue, 2009-12-22 at 19:39 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 20, 2009 at 04:50:22PM +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Sun, 2009-12-20 at 17:22 +0100, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Now that we have a 2.6.32 kernel in unstable, can you updates us
> > > on the various things mentioned in this mail?
> > >
> > > For instance, as I understand it, most other distro's recently
> > > had a release with a 2.6.31 kernel?
> >
> > Fedora 12, Ubuntu 9.10 and openSUSE 11.2 have this kernel version.
> >
> > > Do you know if there are
> > > plans to have a kernel with backported drivers, one used by
> > > multiple distributions?
> >
> > I've not heard of a general plan for that. However there is a
> > compat-wireless project (covering Wifi and Bluetooth drivers) that I
> > think Fedora and Ubuntu are pulling from. That might be something we
> > should do too.
>
> For etch we had an Etch-And-A-Half kernel to add support for new
> hardware. Which also meant we had to upgrade some things because
> the kernel has the habbit of breaking things. I don't know if
> there are simular plans for lenny?

No, this would have had to be planned for in the middle of this year,
but then we were told squeeze would freeze in December.

Currently you can install kernel images from unstable or backports
without any extra dependencies. I'm not aware of any significant
breakage though some packages may rely on deprecated and removed stuff
in procfs or sysfs.

> Anyway what I would really like to see is a kernel that adds
> support for more hardware and fixes bugs without any other changes.

We already do backport new hardware support in response to specific
requests.

> I believe that 2.6.16.x was supposed to do that, but in the end
> only contained bug fixes. And they now seem to have various
> versions for which they fix bugs.

Right, and 2.6.32 will be one of them.

> But this doesn't solve our
> problem that by the time we release our kernel is probably
> outdated already for new hardware. And this is about more than
> just wifi and bluetooth.
>
> I was hoping that various distributions could work together to
> have long time support for 1 kernel version that adds new hardware
> support. Where that would be atleast some time after squeeze+1 is
> released. Since the other distro's used a 2.6.31 kernel recently,
> and we seem to be going for 2.6.32(?), it seems unlikely that we
> can get all to work on 1 such kernel version.

We talked to the Ubuntu kernel team and the plan is that Ubuntu 10.04
LTS will also use 2.6.32.

> But maybe we should look at what the "enterprise" versions will be
> using instead?

RHEL 6 is due real soon now. I hope they will also go with 2.6.32, but
RH is keeping very quiet about such specifics. SLE 11 is not that old
so I don't expect SUSE will use this version.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Experience is what causes a person to make new mistakes instead of old ones.
 
Old 12-22-2009, 11:51 PM
Frans Pop
 
Default Bits from the kernel team

Ben Hutchings wrote:
> Currently you can install kernel images from unstable or backports
> without any extra dependencies. I'm not aware of any significant
> breakage though some packages may rely on deprecated and removed stuff
> in procfs or sysfs.

I've been running upstream kernels without any problems on Lenny.

The only issue I'm aware of is that the init script of nfs-kernel-server is
not compatible with 2.6.32.
The following change in /etc/init.d/nfs-kernel-server fixes this:
# See if our running kernel supports the NFS kernel server
- if [ -f /proc/kallsyms ] && ! grep -qE 'init_nf(sd| )' /proc/kallsyms; then
+ if ! [ -d /sys/module/nfsd ]; then

Cheers,
FJP


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 12-22-2009, 11:57 PM
Frans Pop
 
Default Bits from the kernel team

Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> Now that we have a 2.6.32 kernel in unstable, can you updates us
> on the various things mentioned in this mail?

I have another question. The naming policy for linux-image packages seems
to have changed: instead of an ABI we now have "trunk". First I thought
this was a bug, but now that meta packages have been updated to use trunk
too that seems unlikely.

I've not seen any announcement for this, nor any discussion on how this may
affect other packages (such as packages building out of tree modules and
Debian Installer).

I've always considered the fact that a kernel update with a different ABI
did not replace the current kernel an important feature (reducing the need
for an immediate reboot).

Are we no longer interested in the ABI?
What will happen during/after upgrades if the ABI does change?

Would someone care to explain to the rest of the project?

Cheers,
FJP


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:38 PM.

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