On 18.04.2007 23:23, Dave Jones wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 01:47:55PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
I'd say let F7 testing iron out 2.6.21 for a while before deciding
about
FC6. We should be in the part of freeze where serious Fedora weenies
are
doing a lot of testing.
Getting 2.6.21 into FC6 does also have the additional advantage that it's an extra round of testing for what will become the F7 kernel.
+1 -- putting in in updates-testing quite soon might be a start.
+1 for moving it straight into updates for reasons already stated plus isn't a kernel upgrade dependent on user confirmation? I have always felt for this reason that updates-testing is not the right place for testing kernels as the installonlyn plugin for yum ensures that a backup kernel (hopefully stable) is always available.
Cheers Chris
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 05:08:29PM +0100, Chris Brown wrote:
On 18.04.2007 23:23, Dave Jones wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 01:47:55PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
I'd say let F7 testing iron out 2.6.21 for a while before deciding
about
FC6. We should be in the part of freeze where serious Fedora weenies
are
doing a lot of testing.
Getting 2.6.21 into FC6 does also have the additional advantage that it's an extra round of testing for what will become the F7 kernel.
+1 -- putting in in updates-testing quite soon might be a start.
+1 for moving it straight into updates for reasons already stated plus isn't a kernel upgrade dependent on user confirmation? I have always felt for this reason that updates-testing is not the right place for testing kernels as the installonlyn plugin for yum ensures that a backup kernel (hopefully stable) is always available.
I usually recommend at least 1 day in updates-testing, if only to catch any *really* stupid bugs. A few times I've been hit by dumb packaging thinkos and even a few 'doesnt boot' bugs which were blindingly obvious after testing. Especially the older hardware, which I don't test as much these days.
updates-testing doesn't get the level of feedback that I'd like to see, but I think this is largely because a lot of people don't know it's there. If firstboot had a "would you like to test experimental updates?" dialog, we may find we get a lot more feedback. Well,.. I can dream.
Dave
On 19/04/07, Dave Jones davej@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 05:08:29PM +0100, Chris Brown wrote:
On 18.04.2007 23:23, Dave Jones wrote:
On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 01:47:55PM -0700, Roland McGrath wrote:
I'd say let F7 testing iron out 2.6.21 for a while before
deciding
about
FC6. We should be in the part of freeze where serious Fedora
weenies
are
doing a lot of testing.
Getting 2.6.21 into FC6 does also have the additional advantage that it's an extra round of testing for what will become the F7 kernel.
+1 -- putting in in updates-testing quite soon might be a start.
+1 for moving it straight into updates for reasons already stated plus
isn't
a kernel upgrade dependent on user confirmation? I have always felt for
this
reason that updates-testing is not the right place for testing kernels
as
the installonlyn plugin for yum ensures that a backup kernel (hopefully stable) is always available.
I usually recommend at least 1 day in updates-testing, if only to catch any *really* stupid bugs. A few times I've been hit by dumb packaging thinkos and even a few 'doesnt boot' bugs which were blindingly obvious after testing. Especially the older hardware, which I don't test as much these days.
updates-testing doesn't get the level of feedback that I'd like to see, but I think this is largely because a lot of people don't know it's there. If firstboot had a "would you like to test experimental updates?" dialog, we may find we get a lot more feedback. Well,.. I can dream.
If I want to test the latest and greatest I've always used your people.redhat.com/davej ftp. It would be good to have the above option you mention and the place for it would be the additional CD's dialog. I only discovered updates-testing by chance myself. I think there is room for a middle-ground between rawhide and updates but its probably a discussion for a list other than this one...
Chris
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 07:52:47PM +0100, Chris Brown wrote:
If I want to test the latest and greatest I've always used your people.redhat.com/davej ftp.
At one point I had a cronjob that would sync the latest I'd built through the buildsys there, but it broke when we migrated to a newer buildsystem. I keep meaning to get around to fixing it up.
*adds to todays todo*
Dave
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 03:11:42PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 07:52:47PM +0100, Chris Brown wrote:
If I want to test the latest and greatest I've always used your people.redhat.com/davej ftp.
At one point I had a cronjob that would sync the latest I'd built through the buildsys there, but it broke when we migrated to a newer buildsystem. I keep meaning to get around to fixing it up.
*adds to todays todo*
That wasn't so hard. http://people.redhat.com/davej/kernels/Fedora/fc7/ will update each time a build completes. It should also be yum'able.
I excluded the debuginfo's as they're a) ginormous, b) rarely needed and c) take forever to sync to the webserver. Oh, and would probably murder my quota there.
Dave
On 19/04/07, Dave Jones davej@redhat.com wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 03:11:42PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 07:52:47PM +0100, Chris Brown wrote:
If I want to test the latest and greatest I've always used your people.redhat.com/davej ftp.
At one point I had a cronjob that would sync the latest I'd built through the buildsys there, but it broke when we migrated to a newer buildsystem. I keep meaning to get around to fixing it up.
*adds to todays todo*
That wasn't so hard. http://people.redhat.com/davej/kernels/Fedora/fc7/ will update each time a build completes. It should also be yum'able.
I excluded the debuginfo's as they're a) ginormous, b) rarely needed and c) take forever to sync to the webserver. Oh, and would probably murder my quota there.
Nice. I've asked the question regarding enabling updates-testing on the development list. This is an ideal chance to test pungi. So thanks for the suggestion.
Chris
kernel@lists.fedoraproject.org