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 09-23-2010, 07:37 AM
drago01
 
Default Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 8:34 AM, Nicolas Mailhot
<nicolas.mailhot@laposte.net> wrote:
> Le mercredi 22 septembre 2010 à 21:30 -0400, Gerald Henriksen a écrit :
>
>> After all Gnome 2.32 isn't released until later this month, and the
>> beta releases have been included in Fedora 14 up to now.
>
> Is that a good example ? Gnome has been broken one way or another in
> Fedora 14 since branching point (I'm missing the *stable* GNOME
> experience I had in rawhide). The desktop team usually handles
> alpha/beta well, but this time they've overshot imho.

Well this cycle there was "on the way to gnome3 and back" situation,
which caused a lot of churn (even upstream).
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 09-23-2010, 07:59 AM
Richard Hughes
 
Default Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

On 23 September 2010 08:37, drago01 <drago01@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well this cycle there was "on the way to gnome3 and back" situation,
> which caused a lot of churn (even upstream).

For what it's worth, the GNOME "will we, won't we" on a few different
issues (GApplication, GTK3, etc) has cost a lot of developer time, and
from an upstream perspective was a royal pain in the behind. I think
Matthias has done a wonderful job keeping F14 in some sort of
semblance, even with all this upstream turmoil.

I think 2.32 is going to be a pretty good, stable release, but a lot
of people (myself included) are saving the new bells and whistles for
GNOME 3.0. Expect the Fedora 15 feature page for GNOME to read a
little more interesting, for sure.

Richard.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 09-23-2010, 08:24 AM
Nicolas Mailhot
 
Default Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

Le jeudi 23 septembre 2010 à 08:59 +0100, Richard Hughes a écrit :
> On 23 September 2010 08:37, drago01 <drago01@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Well this cycle there was "on the way to gnome3 and back" situation,
> > which caused a lot of churn (even upstream).
>
> For what it's worth, the GNOME "will we, won't we" on a few different
> issues (GApplication, GTK3, etc) has cost a lot of developer time, and
> from an upstream perspective was a royal pain in the behind. I think
> Matthias has done a wonderful job keeping F14 in some sort of
> semblance, even with all this upstream turmoil.

I agree completely.

My point was that it is *hard* to push new major versions reliably
just-before-freeze, that even big stable paid teams with lots of
experience like the desktop team do not always manage it well, and
people should stop claiming this kind of update is suitable for a stable
release just because they'd like it to happen.

Major updates require lots of testing to limit harmful side-effects.
People have the choice of waiting for the next stable release, while
this testing occurs in rawhide and alpha/beta/etc, or provide this
testing live in rawhide. Direct dump in stable with minimal testing and
no problems, is a nice fantasy, but it's just that, a *fantasy*. Facts
do not agree with this idea.

Upstream projects that claim it can be done usually define "working" as
"my stuff works, if I broke something in other apps it's not my
problem" (netscape projects like mozilla, firefox & nss are a case in
point: they are pathologically unable to provide updates that work well
with the rest of the ecosystem. It only works on windows because there
the rest of the ecosystem is so foreign it shares nothing with them)

--
Nicolas Mailhot
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 09-23-2010, 08:25 AM
drago01
 
Default Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Richard Hughes <hughsient@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 23 September 2010 08:37, drago01 <drago01@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Well this cycle there was "on the way to gnome3 and back" situation,
>> which caused a lot of churn (even upstream).
>
> For what it's worth, the GNOME "will we, won't we" on a few different
> issues (GApplication, GTK3, etc) has cost a lot of developer time, and
> from an upstream perspective was a royal pain in the behind.

That's what I meant with "even upstream".

> I think
> Matthias has done a wonderful job keeping F14 in some sort of
> semblance, even with all this upstream turmoil.

No disagreement here.

> I think 2.32 is going to be a pretty good, stable release, but a lot
> of people (myself included) are saving the new bells and whistles for
> GNOME 3.0. Expect the Fedora 15 feature page for GNOME to read a
> little more interesting, for sure.

Neither here
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 09-23-2010, 01:34 PM
Brandon Lozza
 
Default Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

> Er, whut? I didn't post anything advocating people use Rawhide for
> day-to-day purposes. I wouldn't suggest such a thing. All I said was
> that I haven't noticed the speed difference between debug and non-debug
> kernels, because I haven't. I know it's measurably present, but it
> doesn't affect any of my typical usage visibly.

People are recommending it for people who want the latest software.
Which isn't what Rawhide is for (based on all information I've read
and know about it).

We seem to have users who want less updates and no changes. We also
have users who want to be on the forefront of change. I think everyone
could be helped by making it easier to use repos for non savvy users.
It would keep the main repo focused on stable software for users who
are afraid of change. The alternate repos would be available for the
more adventurous users or developers. Rawhide is for testers and
developers. I don't think anyone sane uses Rawhide for 'production
use' or even 'general purpose use' unless testing.

Some people also pointed out another interesting tidbit and that is
proprietary video drivers. Some of us use them and want to be able to
use them. We wouldn't be using a rawhide kernel if it won't load the
modules. I assume users of proprietary kernel drivers would have to
set it up in f13 with rpmfusion and nvidia-akmod first before
upgrading to rawhide.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 09-23-2010, 03:57 PM
Bruno Wolff III
 
Default Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 09:34:12 -0400,
Brandon Lozza <brandon@pwnage.ca> wrote:
>
> Some people also pointed out another interesting tidbit and that is
> proprietary video drivers. Some of us use them and want to be able to
> use them. We wouldn't be using a rawhide kernel if it won't load the
> modules. I assume users of proprietary kernel drivers would have to
> set it up in f13 with rpmfusion and nvidia-akmod first before
> upgrading to rawhide.

The kmod rpms for rawhide are already provided by rpmfusion. I don't know
how often they do them nor how often new kernel releases just plain
break the proprietary drivers. But it sure likes look at least some of
the time you should be able to use them.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 09-23-2010, 04:23 PM
Michael Cronenworth
 
Default Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> The kmod rpms for rawhide are already provided by rpmfusion. I don't know
> how often they do them nor how often new kernel releases just plain
> break the proprietary drivers. But it sure likes look at least some of
> the time you should be able to use them.

Bruno, you can't use certain proprietary modules with debugging kernels.
GPL symbols prevent you. In particular, the LOCKDEP stuff.

Frank mentioned[1] a viable option for Rawhide, but with Rawhide broken
more often then not, it still isn't a viable option to use every day. I
can't recommend it to Joe Schmoe if he wants Firefox 4.0 and he runs
into broken deps or broken apps and goes off and uses Ubuntu or SuSE
because of it.

[1]
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/kernel/2010-September/002688.html
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 09-23-2010, 07:29 PM
Gerald Henriksen
 
Default Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

On Thu, 23 Sep 2010 08:34:06 +0200, you wrote:

>Le mercredi 22 septembre 2010 à 21:30 -0400, Gerald Henriksen a écrit :
>
>> After all Gnome 2.32 isn't released until later this month, and the
>> beta releases have been included in Fedora 14 up to now.
>
>Is that a good example ? Gnome has been broken one way or another in
>Fedora 14 since branching point (I'm missing the *stable* GNOME
>experience I had in rawhide). The desktop team usually handles
>alpha/beta well, but this time they've overshot imho.

Well, Gnome has a proven track record and this release seems to be the
exception. In fairness to the desktop team, who seem to have been
given a mess with the delay of Gnome 3, I think Gnome should have
skpped the 2.32 release rather than this attempt to get something
newish just to meet a schedule. It's unfortunate that the desktop
team will get blamed for what is a Gnome mistake.

But the broader point is what criteria is used to determine what
software gets included in a given release of Fedora. A key point in
the drive to have stable releases is that it is only a "6 month" wait
to get a newer version of something into Fedora. But there is a
danger that this can go too far and end up being 9 or 10 months if a
project must have a final release before Fedora branches.

Someone wanting the latest PostgreSQL is looking at an 8 month wait
(assuming a May Fedora 15), and anything that was released in August
but not included in the Fedora 14 branch has 9 months if we don't
allow pre-releases.



--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 09-23-2010, 08:10 PM
Bruno Wolff III
 
Default Fedora "backports" repo? (Was PostgreSQL 9 for F14?)

On Thu, Sep 23, 2010 at 11:23:25 -0500,
Michael Cronenworth <mike@cchtml.com> wrote:
> Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > The kmod rpms for rawhide are already provided by rpmfusion. I don't know
> > how often they do them nor how often new kernel releases just plain
> > break the proprietary drivers. But it sure likes look at least some of
> > the time you should be able to use them.
>
> Bruno, you can't use certain proprietary modules with debugging kernels.
> GPL symbols prevent you. In particular, the LOCKDEP stuff.

That's interesting, because rpmfusion has nvidia modules in their
development repo. It could be that they were for older kernels or
something, I didn't look at the versions too closely.

> Frank mentioned[1] a viable option for Rawhide, but with Rawhide broken
> more often then not, it still isn't a viable option to use every day. I
> can't recommend it to Joe Schmoe if he wants Firefox 4.0 and he runs
> into broken deps or broken apps and goes off and uses Ubuntu or SuSE
> because of it.

To use rawhide you really need to be able to fix things; so you need to
be an advanced user. There is also the branched release. It should be
a bit better than rawhide, but does seem to get broken on occasion.
Builds go through testing, so there is a chance to catch a lot of the
bad stuff there before it gets to people not using testing. This would
still be for advanced linux users.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 06:32 AM.

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