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 01-31-2008, 09:04 PM
Otavio Salvador
 
Default Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

[ Reply-To adjusted to debian-boot so we can keep this discussion in a
single mailing list ]

Hello folks,

I've been working at migrations of packages for lenny and I think
we're more or less fine to define a timeline to the end of Febuary for
the release of Beta1.

This is going to be my first release as d-i RM and so I'm a bit
nervous and doing small mistakes (as everybody has probably noticed
already).

There're few open questions that I'd like to discuss here before we
make it:

- kernel to release

We have 2.6.22 as a safe bed on lenny now and their udebs are there
too however since EtchAndHalf intends to release with 2.6.24 and it
has been uploaded to sid already I'm considering a better option to
us to release with it.

linux-2.6 has been built in all architectures and
linux-modules-extra-2.6 has been fastly processed (thanks
ftpmasters) and then we could manage to get a massbuild done in few
days (+- 5 of febuary or even before). I've started to check the
new modules and prepare the patches for kernel-wedge for it and
hope to get it ready for tomorrow or so.

- e2fsprogs inode size change

Lastest release[1] changed the default inode size to 256
bytes. This is not yet on lenny but is already available on sid and
will hit lenny in few days.

1. http://e2fsprogs.sourceforge.net/e2fsprogs-release.html#1.40.5

Currently, there's a know problem with GRUB[2] and the safest solution
is to change the current inode size back to 128 bytes using -I
option of mke2fs for Beta1 release and then work on GRUB or GRUB2
to support it for lenny Beta2 release with 256 bytes again.

2. http://bugs.debian.org/463236

Please, I'd like to ask for comments on above points so we can decide
about the timeline.

The current timeline that looks sane is:

+---------+-----------------------------------------------+
|Date |What happens |
+---------+-----------------------------------------------+
|2/1/2007 |translation update request is send |
+---------+-----------------------------------------------+
|2/15/2007|mass upload of translation updates |
+---------+-----------------------------------------------+
|2/15/2007|kernel, modules and their udebs hitted testing |
+---------+-----------------------------------------------+
|2/16/2007|mass migration of udebs |
+---------+-----------------------------------------------+
|2/17/2007|debian-installer is uploaded |
+---------+-----------------------------------------------+
|2/19/2007|daily images are changed to use lenny installer|
+---------+-----------------------------------------------+
|2/21/2007|test of images starts |
+---------+-----------------------------------------------+
|2/27/2007|final image builds |
+---------+-----------------------------------------------+
|3/1/2007 |planned release date |
+---------+-----------------------------------------------+

Obviously, to be able to get there, we all need to work together. This
means that d-i team, kernel team, release team, and package
maintainers of packages that builds udebs will need to work closely
those days and cooperate each other.

One thing that could delay whole release is the migration of xorg
package to testing. It needs to go otherwise we won't have desktop
installation properly working on Beta1 since we don't use discover1
and xresprobe for detection anymore.

I'm sure we all can do that and I'll do my best to work closely of you
all too.

What people say?

- --
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
- ---------------------------------------------
E-mail: otavio@debian.org UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br
- ---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives
you the whole house."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8+ <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iD8DBQFHokXDLqiZQEml+FURApdJAJ9o2u2TlzMuNhB1tNKrGg f0O6oBCgCeKX55
ILVAsJMEyGfP0vCI2h58yEo=
=sWpY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 01-31-2008, 10:29 PM
dann frazier
 
Default Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

On Thu, Jan 31, 2008 at 08:04:23PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> - kernel to release
>
> We have 2.6.22 as a safe bed on lenny now and their udebs are there
> too however since EtchAndHalf intends to release with 2.6.24 and it
> has been uploaded to sid already I'm considering a better option to
> us to release with it.

2.6.24 is our default - 2.6.22 is a backup. We wanted to get some
testing in sid first, and should be able to make a more informed
decision based on user reports in about a week.

> linux-2.6 has been built in all architectures and
> linux-modules-extra-2.6 has been fastly processed (thanks
> ftpmasters)

and waldi, maks, panthera

> and then we could manage to get a massbuild done in few
> days (+- 5 of febuary or even before). I've started to check the
> new modules and prepare the patches for kernel-wedge for it and
> hope to get it ready for tomorrow or so.

Awesome.
Is there anything special we need to add to deal with etch 1/2
kernel metapackages? We were talking about using a name like
linux-image-2.6-686-etchnhalf.

--
dann frazier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-02-2008, 01:51 AM
Joey Hess
 
Default Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

Otavio Salvador wrote:
> We have 2.6.22 as a safe bed on lenny now and their udebs are there
> too however since EtchAndHalf intends to release with 2.6.24 and it
> has been uploaded to sid already I'm considering a better option to
> us to release with it.
>
> linux-2.6 has been built in all architectures and
> linux-modules-extra-2.6 has been fastly processed (thanks
> ftpmasters) and then we could manage to get a massbuild done in few
> days (+- 5 of febuary or even before). I've started to check the
> new modules and prepare the patches for kernel-wedge for it and
> hope to get it ready for tomorrow or so.

It's far to early to switch d-i to 2.6.24, especially since it drops
support for most of /proc/acpi, including the parts used by
laptop-detect.

--
see shy jo
 
Old 02-02-2008, 09:20 AM
Colin Watson
 
Default Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 09:51:07PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> It's far to early to switch d-i to 2.6.24, especially since it drops
> support for most of /proc/acpi, including the parts used by
> laptop-detect.

I suspect you already know this, but for the record, that's not an
intrinsic property of 2.6.24; enabling CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS_POWER again
will restore compatibility.

--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@debian.org]


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-02-2008, 08:47 PM
Otavio Salvador
 
Default Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

Joey Hess <joeyh@debian.org> writes:

> Otavio Salvador wrote:
>> We have 2.6.22 as a safe bed on lenny now and their udebs are there
>> too however since EtchAndHalf intends to release with 2.6.24 and it
>> has been uploaded to sid already I'm considering a better option to
>> us to release with it.
>>
>> linux-2.6 has been built in all architectures and
>> linux-modules-extra-2.6 has been fastly processed (thanks
>> ftpmasters) and then we could manage to get a massbuild done in few
>> days (+- 5 of febuary or even before). I've started to check the
>> new modules and prepare the patches for kernel-wedge for it and
>> hope to get it ready for tomorrow or so.
>
> It's far to early to switch d-i to 2.6.24, especially since it drops
> support for most of /proc/acpi, including the parts used by
> laptop-detect.

I've uploaded laptop-detect with this fixed (using your provided
patch) so it is solved on sid now.

--
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
---------------------------------------------
E-mail: otavio@debian.org UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br
---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives
you the whole house."


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-02-2008, 08:51 PM
Frederik Schueler
 
Default Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

Hi,

On Fri, Feb 01, 2008 at 09:51:07PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> It's far to early to switch d-i to 2.6.24, especially since it drops
> support for most of /proc/acpi, including the parts used by
> laptop-detect.

I still think this switch was an extremely premature and really, really
bad idea.
We need either to turn the acpi proc interface back on before .24
migrates to testing, or we track a .24 with this change outside of the
archive, which is a no go for me.

So, let's reenable CONFIG_ACPI_PROCFS_POWER, please.

Best regards
Frederik Schüler

--
ENOSIG
 
Old 02-02-2008, 10:51 PM
Frans Pop
 
Default Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

On Friday 01 February 2008, dann frazier wrote:
> Is there anything special we need to add to deal with etch 1/2
> kernel metapackages? We were talking about using a name like
> linux-image-2.6-686-etchnhalf.

As I explained in my mails re etch+1/2 some time back [1] , D-I simply will
not install the correct kernel unless either:
- the user installs at medium/low priority and selects the correct kernel
- the user preseeds the exact kernel version at the boot prompt
(the addition of an alias as discussed back then to make that easier has
_not_ yet been implemented) [2]
- something is changed in base-installer to make it select the updated
kernel automatically

Having metapackages with whatever name changes nothing in those facts.

I have been quite disappointed that there was no real follow-up to my mails,
which now leaves us in the situation that there is basically no support yet
to select the correct kernel for etch+1/2.


If the metapackages will be limited to Etch (i.e. only purpose is to allow
easy updates in case of ABI-changing security updates), I have no real
objection to naming them etchnhalf, although I think it is a disastrous
option for people who may have to type it at the command line.

Cheers,
FJP

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2007/12/msg00234.html + thread
[2] Note that adding the preseeding on the CD is _not_ going to work as
that does not allow selecting a correct kernel flavor.
 
Old 02-03-2008, 06:23 PM
Otavio Salvador
 
Default Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

With all comments that has been sent to this thread, I've changed the
timeline to the following:

+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
| Date | What happens |
+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|February 5, 2007 |translation update request is send |
+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|February 15, 2007 |mass upload of translation updates |
+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|February 15, 2007 |kernel, modules and their udebs hitted testing |
+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|February 18, 2007 |mass migration of udebs |
+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|February 19, 2007 |debian-installer is uploaded |
+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|February 21, 2007 |daily images are changed to use lenny installer|
+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|February 23, 2007 |test of images starts |
+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|March 1, 2007 |final image builds |
+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+
|March 3, 2007 |planned release date |
+------------------+-----------------------------------------------+

As suggested by Frans, with many good points, we'll release with
2.6.22 but just after it, we'll start to work to release another beta
with 2.6.24 kernel.

Please ack this timeline and comment on it. I guess we're ok now.

- --
O T A V I O S A L V A D O R
- ---------------------------------------------
E-mail: otavio@debian.org UIN: 5906116
GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855
Home Page: http://otavio.ossystems.com.br
- ---------------------------------------------
"Microsoft sells you Windows ... Linux gives
you the whole house."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.8+ <http://mailcrypt.sourceforge.net/>

iD8DBQFHphSaLqiZQEml+FURArq2AKCs3tjiR8wrW/sCqDwO0yZeD0KL2ACgnzLL
Mv/ksAJ5bfSmDhGDw/vnJL4=
=OI02
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-05-2008, 07:13 AM
dann frazier
 
Default Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 05:23:14PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> As suggested by Frans, with many good points, we'll release with
> 2.6.22 but just after it, we'll start to work to release another beta
> with 2.6.24 kernel.

This should allow us to install a etchnhalf 2.6.24 on hardware supported
by 2.6.22, and then the follow-on beta would add support for the
remaining hardware (that supported by 2.6.24 but not 2.6.22). Unless
someone sees a problem with this, it seems fine to me.

--
dann frazier


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
 
Old 02-05-2008, 05:03 PM
Martin Michlmayr
 
Default Beta1 missing decisions and possible timeline

* dann frazier <dannf@debian.org> [2008-02-05 01:13]:
> On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 05:23:14PM -0200, Otavio Salvador wrote:
> > As suggested by Frans, with many good points, we'll release with
> > 2.6.22 but just after it, we'll start to work to release another beta
> > with 2.6.24 kernel.
>
> This should allow us to install a etchnhalf 2.6.24 on hardware supported
> by 2.6.22, and then the follow-on beta would add support for the
> remaining hardware (that supported by 2.6.24 but not 2.6.22). Unless
> someone sees a problem with this, it seems fine to me.

I think it's a good idea to do beta releases more regularly and it
definitely makes sense to base the next beta on the 2.6.24 release
which will also be used for etchnhalf. At the same time, I'm a bit
unhappy because 2.6.25 will finally have support for the Orion (ARM)
platform which I'd like to support in d-i soon, and putting out a beta
based on 2.6.24 will delay Orion support quite a bit.

Given we're doing a beta based on 2.6.22 now, how quickly could we get
another beta based on 2.6.24 out? Can you be done relatively quickly
after the beta based on 2.6.22?

Another solution would be to backport Orion support from 2.6.25 to
2.6.24.
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/


--
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 10:12 PM.

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