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 > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-09-2008, 06:22 PM
Thorsten Leemhuis
 
Default Fedora too cutting edge?

On 09.01.2008 19:45, Hans de Goede wrote:
> One of the few reasons why Fedora is my distro of choice is because its usually
> cutting edge, and I like to be where the development is happening.

+1

> However today I've had an encounter with Fedora which make me wonder if
> sometimes we aren't a little too cutting edge.

See below. But actually I think we here and there are not even cutting
edge enough; we for example left users on Firefox2 for FC6 for about 7
months until we shipped F7 -- that looked totally odd for a distribution
that is curring edge in most other areas.

Another example: hplip is still on 2.7.7 for F8 right now while upstream
is at 2.7.12 in between and supports 22 new printers (
http://hplip.sourceforge.net/release_notes.html ). We don't provide any
solutions for users that buy those printers right now besides using
rawhide. Thus they have to wait/ask for a proper update or wait until F9
or -- the latter means waiting about 6 months for driver. That's IMHO
unacceptable -- especially as printer manufacturers release successor
models quite often (it feels to me like a new successor model get
released in each printer class about once a year, but I didn't check).

> I tried to get an industrial
> firewire camera to work with the stock Fedora kernel using the juju stack. Long
> [...]
> story short, it didn't work.
>
> Does this mean that Fedora should not have shipped the new stack? No it
> doesn't! Getting code out there early into many hands for testing is a good thing.

+1

> What IMHO we should have done is build both the new and the oldstack, which is
> possible on the kernel side, and modify our patches to userspace to support the
> juju stack, so that the userspace libs can work with either one. On top of this
> we should then have written a small gui utility for easy switching.

That's what I call "Fedora knows better then you". It's afaics not the
first time Fedora forces users to use a new technology instead of giving
them a choice for a small period. For example there are still users that
would like to use the ntfs-module from the kernel, but we don't enable
it (making ntfs-3g the default and eabling ntfs in the kernel should
solve this problem). Another example: Xgl never made it into the Fedora
repos (which in parts is due to packaging problems, but it looks a bit
odd). Another example: Zope/Plone was excluded in F7 and later because
we jumped to python 2.5 but didn't want to ship a compat-python package
(this + Zope/Plone are now in livna for F7 and soon F8 and devel).

> Another example of Fedora being to cutting edge is pulseaudio, [...]

Not sure about pulseaudio -- works well for me afaics. But yeah, might
be a similar issue.

Linux is about choice.

Just my 2 cent.

Cu
knurd

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-09-2008, 06:31 PM
"Yaakov Nemoy"
 
Default Fedora too cutting edge?

On Jan 9, 2008 1:45 PM, Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl> wrote:
> Does this mean that Fedora should not have shipped the new stack? No it
> doesn't! Getting code out there early into many hands for testing is a good thing.
>
> What IMHO we should have done is build both the new and the oldstack, which is
> possible on the kernel side, and modify our patches to userspace to support the
> juju stack, so that the userspace libs can work with either one. On top of this
> we should then have written a small gui utility for easy switching.

Supporting two versions of anything, especially on the same system is
much harder than it looks. The people in charge have to make sure
that the old version still works, even if it's unmaintained upstream,
the new version works somewhat, so it doesn't completely suck, the
userspace stack surrounding kernel bits has to work equally as well,
so that the transition is smooth, the interoperability between the
new/old components and the rest of the system is equal, etc...

Then they have to worry about security advisories on both components,
managing two packages where there could be one, propagating static
materials twice, like documentation and configuration details, writing
documentation on how to switch back and forth for those butterflies
that are interested in making things work well, etc...

All in all, it takes alot more manpower than what's available right now.

-Yaakov

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-09-2008, 06:45 PM
Hans de Goede
 
Default Fedora too cutting edge?

Yaakov Nemoy wrote:

On Jan 9, 2008 1:45 PM, Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl> wrote:

Does this mean that Fedora should not have shipped the new stack? No it
doesn't! Getting code out there early into many hands for testing is a good thing.

What IMHO we should have done is build both the new and the oldstack, which is
possible on the kernel side, and modify our patches to userspace to support the
juju stack, so that the userspace libs can work with either one. On top of this
we should then have written a small gui utility for easy switching.


Supporting two versions of anything, especially on the same system is
much harder than it looks. The people in charge have to make sure
that the old version still works, even if it's unmaintained upstream,
the new version works somewhat, so it doesn't completely suck, the
userspace stack surrounding kernel bits has to work equally as well,
so that the transition is smooth, the interoperability between the
new/old components and the rest of the system is equal, etc...

Then they have to worry about security advisories on both components,
managing two packages where there could be one, propagating static
materials twice, like documentation and configuration details, writing
documentation on how to switch back and forth for those butterflies
that are interested in making things work well, etc...

All in all, it takes alot more manpower than what's available right now.



You are talkin in generivs, where as this are 2 very specific cases, in both
cases I gave the alternative is still actively maintained upstream. In the case
of firewire, the alternative is even the preferred choice of upstream, in the
case of pulseaudio, pa lies on top of alsa, the alternative, so surely we must
still maintain that! I'll admit that in the firewire case there would be some
extra work, but not a lot.


Regards,

Hans

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-09-2008, 06:49 PM
Will Woods
 
Default Fedora too cutting edge?

On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 19:45 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> One of the few reasons why Fedora is my distro of choice is because its usually
> cutting edge, and I like to be where the development is happening.
>
> However today I've had an encounter with Fedora which make me wonder if
> sometimes we aren't a little too cutting edge. I tried to get an industrial
> firewire camera to work with the stock Fedora kernel using the juju stack. Long
> story short, it didn't work.
>
> Which after reading: http://wiki.linux1394.org/JujuMigration Isn't really
> surprising, quoting that page: "Almost no support for IIDC cameras: Not
> compatible with libdc1394 v1. Highly experimental support in libdc1394 v2 which
> works with some luck on only a few OHCI 1.1 controllers. Improvements are to be
> expected in Linux 2.6.25-rc1."
>
> Notice how a preliminary fix is expected for 2.6.25, which probably means that
> this will still be broken in Fedora 9, notice that the breakage was introduced
> in Fedora 7, so thats 18 months worth of broken firewire camera support (iow
> most digital video cameras). Add to that that the above referenced wiki page
> also says: "Regarding Linux 2.6.22 and 2.6.23, the best advice to Linux
> distributors (kernel packagers) ... is: Build only the old IEEE 1394 drivers."

libdc1394 isn't part of Fedora, so that's outside the scope of this
discussion.

As for the necessary Juju bits, they're already in Fedora 7 and Fedora
8. See this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=344851

That fix is included in kernel 2.6.23.9-44.fc7, 2.6.23.9-78.fc8, and
rawhide. It'll hit the *upstream* kernel in 2.6.25.

We were able to write that fix *because* the Juju stack was available in
Fedora.

-w
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-09-2008, 07:06 PM
"John W. Linville"
 
Default Fedora too cutting edge?

On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 07:45:18PM +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:

> One of the few reasons why Fedora is my distro of choice is because its
> usually cutting edge, and I like to be where the development is happening.
>
> However today I've had an encounter with Fedora which make me wonder if
> sometimes we aren't a little too cutting edge.

This question is worth asking, but I have no good answer.

FWIW, I get criticized for pushing too much brand-new wireless
bits into the Fedora kernels. Simultaneously (often the very same
days) I get criticized for taking more than a day or two to get new
upstream wireless patches merged into the Fedora kernels. There is
no winning...

Just my $0.02...

John
--
John W. Linville
linville@redhat.com

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-09-2008, 07:20 PM
Casey Dahlin
 
Default Fedora too cutting edge?

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:

Another example: hplip is still on 2.7.7 for F8 right now while upstream
is at 2.7.12 in between and supports 22 new printers (
http://hplip.sourceforge.net/release_notes.html ). We don't provide any
solutions for users that buy those printers right now besides using
rawhide. Thus they have to wait/ask for a proper update or wait until F9
or -- the latter means waiting about 6 months for driver. That's IMHO
unacceptable -- especially as printer manufacturers release successor
models quite often (it feels to me like a new successor model get
released in each printer class about once a year, but I didn't check).


What about NetworkManger? While our release engineers were screaming
"It's not ready!" and refusing to enable it by default, Ubuntu was being
credited for saving linux with it.


--CJD


--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-09-2008, 07:34 PM
"Stephen John Smoogen"
 
Default Fedora too cutting edge?

On Jan 9, 2008 1:20 PM, Casey Dahlin <cjdahlin@ncsu.edu> wrote:
> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > Another example: hplip is still on 2.7.7 for F8 right now while upstream
> > is at 2.7.12 in between and supports 22 new printers (
> > http://hplip.sourceforge.net/release_notes.html ). We don't provide any
> > solutions for users that buy those printers right now besides using
> > rawhide. Thus they have to wait/ask for a proper update or wait until F9
> > or -- the latter means waiting about 6 months for driver. That's IMHO
> > unacceptable -- especially as printer manufacturers release successor
> > models quite often (it feels to me like a new successor model get
> > released in each printer class about once a year, but I didn't check).
> >
> >
> What about NetworkManger? While our release engineers were screaming
> "It's not ready!" and refusing to enable it by default, Ubuntu was being
> credited for saving linux with it.
>

There are always going to be examples of something that is chosen or
not chosen to work with a release.. and some other distro is going to
do it and get the credit. Fedora has probably gotten credit for things
that Ubuntu was too extreme.. Choices have to be made of how many
engineers are going to focus on some problem and what problems will
have to wait.


--
Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator
How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed
in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice"

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-09-2008, 07:46 PM
Jima
 
Default Fedora too cutting edge?

On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, Hans de Goede wrote:
Notice how a preliminary fix is expected for 2.6.25, which probably means
that this will still be broken in Fedora 9, notice that the breakage was
introduced in Fedora 7, so thats 18 months worth of broken firewire camera
support (iow most digital video cameras).


That seems like a bold, and IMO, unsubstantiated claim. I managed to get
a Firewire camera to work using the new stack a couple weeks ago. I had a
bit of trouble, which lead me to discussions that came to the same general
conclusion that you outlined in your email, but then I tried chown'ing the
/dev/fw-* (or whatever) devices to my user, and things miraculously
worked.
This was on kernel-2.6.23.1-49.fc8; I hadn't gotten around to rebooting
that box in a while (nor have I tried the camera since rebooting to
2.6.23.9-85.fc8).
I won't deny, however, getting burned a time or three by Fedora's
early-adopter practices. :-)


Jima

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-09-2008, 07:56 PM
Hans de Goede
 
Default Fedora too cutting edge?

Will Woods wrote:

On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 19:45 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote:

Hi All,

One of the few reasons why Fedora is my distro of choice is because its usually
cutting edge, and I like to be where the development is happening.


However today I've had an encounter with Fedora which make me wonder if
sometimes we aren't a little too cutting edge. I tried to get an industrial
firewire camera to work with the stock Fedora kernel using the juju stack. Long
story short, it didn't work.


Which after reading: http://wiki.linux1394.org/JujuMigration Isn't really
surprising, quoting that page: "Almost no support for IIDC cameras: Not
compatible with libdc1394 v1. Highly experimental support in libdc1394 v2 which
works with some luck on only a few OHCI 1.1 controllers. Improvements are to be
expected in Linux 2.6.25-rc1."


Notice how a preliminary fix is expected for 2.6.25, which probably means that
this will still be broken in Fedora 9, notice that the breakage was introduced
in Fedora 7, so thats 18 months worth of broken firewire camera support (iow
most digital video cameras). Add to that that the above referenced wiki page
also says: "Regarding Linux 2.6.22 and 2.6.23, the best advice to Linux
distributors (kernel packagers) ... is: Build only the old IEEE 1394 drivers."


libdc1394 isn't part of Fedora, so that's outside the scope of this
discussion.



Well actually it has been in review for quite a while, with the juju stack
being one of the reasons for it not passing review yet (patents is another, but
a patent free version is most likely possible).


I would like to work on getting this into Fedora, and if things could be fixed
so as to work with the new stack, I'm all for it. Shipping something which
still doesn't work in F-9 makes us look rather bad IMHO, doing new things can
cause breakage, but breakage for 3 releases in a row?



As for the necessary Juju bits, they're already in Fedora 7 and Fedora
8. See this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=344851

That fix is included in kernel 2.6.23.9-44.fc7, 2.6.23.9-78.fc8, and
rawhide. It'll hit the *upstream* kernel in 2.6.25.




As for this being fixed, not for my case, as I have a via vt 6306 controller,
which is like, only the most common PC firewire controller on the planet.


Note that I'm more then willing to help debug this, I've added myself to the CC
of: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=415841


Anything I van do to help?

Regards,

Hans

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 01-09-2008, 10:54 PM
Linus Walleij
 
Default Fedora too cutting edge?

On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, John W. Linville wrote:


FWIW, I get criticized for pushing too much brand-new wireless
bits into the Fedora kernels.


I, for one, THANK YOU for doing it John, it saved my day and I'm not going
to forget that. So keep doing what you're doing.


Linus

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:54 AM.

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