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 02-27-2010, 03:41 PM
Adam Williamson
 
Default FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On Sat, 2010-02-27 at 13:26 +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Oh, and by the way:
>
> Orion Poplawski wrote:
> > There is plenty of room for something in between your vision of Fedora
> > and CentOS.
>
> There is plenty of room for something in between your vision of Fedora
> and Rawhide. :-)

To quote something I just sent to someone off-list...I know I've said
this before, but I think this really isn't a resolvable argument, as
both sides have merit. There are those who want stable updates, and
those who want lots of new stuff, and lots of people who are kinda in
the middle (they mostly want a stable system, but will go nuts if they
can't get the newest version of Firefox or whatever). The problem is
that there are indeed lots of visions, and none of them is the 'true
correct one'.

Given that, you can't possibly satisfy everyone with a single update
track. (Yeah, I know technically we have three tracks, but the
separation between them really isn't sufficiently enforced in the tools
or documentation or policies).

Kevin's argument that we should just consider our audience to be the
people who are happy to take everything and stuff the others does have
some merit, actually, but seems a bit restrictive to me. I honestly
prefer the MDV model of two update streams, simply because I was there
before it was implemented and then after it was implemented, and I saw
that it genuinely improved things for users and even for packagers. It
seems like extra work for packagers, but in the end it kinda takes the
pressure off: you only *have* to ship the important fixes
to /updates, /backports is optional, and /backports users are good about
knowing that sometimes what they find there will be broken or have new
bugs or whatever, and tend to know the drill about not getting too upset
and reporting them to you to be fixed. And they know they can easily
fall back to what's in /updates if they find /backports to be broken; it
gives them an escape route.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-27-2010, 03:52 PM
Frank Murphy
 
Default FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On 02/27/2010 04:30 PM, Mail Lists wrote:
an
>
>
> I do want updates. Kernel updates, for example, are very important -
> they carry many improvements - not just drivers but functionality as
> well. The ones that are less obvious are the bugs that happen rarely but
> that can be nasty (an occasional file system glitch for example).
>

As as enduser.
I would agree with this.

On the everyday boxes there is FedoraN + F13Rawhide Kernel(s).

> The rare-but-nasty bug fixes will seldom have user demand - but
> nonetheless once identified and fixed should be shared.

Bug fixes would also be applied.

>
> These kind of non-user-demand driven fixes should not be ignored in any
> noone-is-asking so dont release approach.
>

If it's not broken, don't fix it.

Thats what the F13/Rawhide boxes are for.

--
Regards,

Frank Murphy
UTF_8 Encoded
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-27-2010, 04:16 PM
Orion Poplawski
 
Default FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On 2/27/2010 5:05 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Orion Poplawski wrote:
>
>> There is plenty of room for something in between your vision of Fedora
>> and CentOS.
>>
> But that room is filled by other distros, such as Ubuntu. Why do we need to
> be another Ubuntu?
>

It's not filled by Ubuntu, because Ubuntu is not Fedora. Fedora has the
vision that is the most in line with mine, except for the frequent
update, which so far I have been willing to put up with. But frequent
updates is *not* why I've thrown my hat in with Fedora (sorry .

- Orion
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-27-2010, 04:33 PM
Bruno Wolff III
 
Default FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:30:52 -0500,
Mail Lists <lists@sapience.com> wrote:
>
> [speaking of which where on earth is 2.6.32.9 ????]

http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=158902

And if you want the latest 2.6.33 build:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=158529

There is also a prerelease version of 2.6.34:
http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=158825

I am using 2.6.33 now and will probably track 2.6.34 on at least some
machines once I see that the squashfs/lzma stuff get pulled from linux-next
into Linus' tree.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-27-2010, 04:51 PM
Mail Lists
 
Default FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On 02/27/2010 12:33 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:30:52 -0500,
> Mail Lists <lists@sapience.com> wrote:
>>
>> [speaking of which where on earth is 2.6.32.9 ????]
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=158902
>
> And if you want the latest 2.6.33 build:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=158529
>
> There is also a prerelease version of 2.6.34:
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=158825
>
> I am using 2.6.33 now and will probably track 2.6.34 on at least some
> machines once I see that the squashfs/lzma stuff get pulled from linux-next
> into Linus' tree.


Thanks. Are there any toolsets (dracut, grubby, or other system tools)
that need to be updated to move from .33 fc12 to either .33 or .34 out
of f13 ?

gene
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-27-2010, 04:52 PM
Mail Lists
 
Default FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On 02/27/2010 12:33 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:30:52 -0500,
> Mail Lists <lists@sapience.com> wrote:
>>
>> [speaking of which where on earth is 2.6.32.9 ????]
>
> http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=158902

Thank you .. but I really meant where are as far as updates-testing or
updates is concerned.

gene


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-27-2010, 05:20 PM
Bruno Wolff III
 
Default FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:51:06 -0500,
Mail Lists <lists@sapience.com> wrote:
>
> Thanks. Are there any toolsets (dracut, grubby, or other system tools)
> that need to be updated to move from .33 fc12 to either .33 or .34 out
> of f13 ?

I don't know. I didn't try 2.6.33 on any f12 systems before I updated to
f13. I was running the various 2.6.32 kernels on f12 without a problem.

The only area that I think might be of concern is graphics related packages.
Nouveau especially has a new kernel interface.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-27-2010, 05:23 PM
Bruno Wolff III
 
Default FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 12:52:18 -0500,
Mail Lists <lists@sapience.com> wrote:
> On 02/27/2010 12:33 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 11:30:52 -0500,
> > Mail Lists <lists@sapience.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> [speaking of which where on earth is 2.6.32.9 ????]
> >
> > http://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=158902
>
> Thank you .. but I really meant where are as far as updates-testing or
> updates is concerned.

Why wouldn't you want try the koji version if you were willing to try an
updates-testing version? If it doesn't work for you, you boot the previous
kernel, pretty much the same as when there is a bad test version.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-27-2010, 05:31 PM
Frank Murphy
 
Default FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On 27/02/10 17:51, Mail Lists wrote:
--snipped--
>
>
> Thanks. Are there any toolsets (dracut, grubby, or other system tools)
> that need to be updated to move from .33 fc12 to either .33 or .34 out
> of f13 ?
>
> gene

iirc linux-firmware replaces kernel-firmware, some plymouth stuff.

Do a yum --enablerepo=rawhide update kernel

check that they are indeed "fc13"

and see what it tries to pull in.
If you don't like waht you see type in "n"

--
Regards,

Frank Murphy
UTF_8 Encoded
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-27-2010, 06:07 PM
Mail Lists
 
Default FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

On 02/27/2010 01:23 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:

> Why wouldn't you want try the koji version if you were willing to try an
> updates-testing version? If it doesn't work for you, you boot the previous
> kernel, pretty much the same as when there is a bad test version.


Me ? I am running koji version no problem at all. But this thread (as
a reminder) is about the update process ...

So was really kinda asking - hey - in the spriti of the update process
- is 2.6.32.9 moving to testing and/or stable - or not. And can we learn
anything from this oh so mosy important package!


--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:30 AM.

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