RE: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

RE: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

[Phil Kos]

> Just as it makes no sense to run a not-up-to-date release 
> kernel, it makes
> no sense to keep anything but the very last on line. Just MVHO.

I beg to differ, Herr Doktor von Brand. It makes more sense to run a
not-up-to-date release kernel than it does to slavishly update to every new
release without any pressing need for new features or functionality. Don't
fall into the commercial software trap of "it's newer, so it *must* be
better!"--here be tygers...


- phil

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

[Oliver Neukum]

Am Freitag, 10. August 2001 21:29 schrieb Phil Kos:
> > Just as it makes no sense to run a not-up-to-date release
> > kernel, it makes
> > no sense to keep anything but the very last on line. Just MVHO.
>
> I beg to differ, Herr Doktor von Brand. It makes more sense to run a
> not-up-to-date release kernel than it does to slavishly update to every new
> release without any pressing need for new features or functionality. Don't
> fall into the commercial software trap of "it's newer, so it *must* be
> better!"--here be tygers...

The problem is not what people should be running. The kernels people are 
actually running are relevant. Any kernel on a CD sold in the last ~3 years 
is run and bug reports will arrive.
If you choose to ignore anything but the latest standard kernels you loose a 
large number of testers and bugs will go unnoticed longer.

	Regards
		Oliver

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

[Rik van Riel]

On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> Am Freitag, 10. August 2001 21:29 schrieb Phil Kos:

> If you choose to ignore anything but the latest standard kernels you
> loose a large number of testers and bugs will go unnoticed longer.

Oliver, Phil,

are you willing to volunteer for keeping the information
on the older kernels alive ?

regards,

Rik
--
IA64: a worthy successor to i860.

http://www.surriel.com/		http://distro.conectiva.com/

Send all your spam to aardvark@nl.linux.org (spam digging piggy)

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

[Kent Borg]

On Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 12:29:04PM -0700, Phil Kos wrote:
> > Just as it makes no sense to run a not-up-to-date release 
> > kernel, it makes
> > no sense to keep anything but the very last on line. Just MVHO.
> 
> I beg to differ, Herr Doktor von Brand. It makes more sense to run a
> not-up-to-date release kernel than it does to slavishly update to every new
> release without any pressing need for new features or functionality. 

Another reason to keep sources around: to know what is in a newer
kernel.

Right now I am wondering where I can find linuxppc_2_5 revision 1.442.
Not because I want to run it, but because I am told it was the basis
of a 2.4.2 kernel tree we have, and it would be useful in knowing what
changes are important as we try to move our work forward.  Over two
thousand files changed from official 2.4.2 to what we started
with--but I am guessing only a relatively small number of those
changes are important to us.  Getting a copy of that old kernel would
be useful in sorting it all out.


-kb, the Kent who would love to hear where he could get a copy of
linuxppc_2_5 revision 1.442.

[ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

[Christoph Hellwig]

I'd like to announce a the availability of unpacked vendor kernel RPMs
on www.kernelnewbies.org.  We allow taking a look at the specfile and
the various patches included in that packages.  Currently the follwing
kernel packages are prvovided (others are of course welcome):

	Caldera OpenLinux 3.1 (linux-2.4.2-11)
	Red Hat Linux 7.1 (kernel-2.4.2-2)

Please take a look at http://www.kernelnewbies.org/kernels/

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

[Marco Colombo]

On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

>
> I'd like to announce a the availability of unpacked vendor kernel RPMs
> on www.kernelnewbies.org.  We allow taking a look at the specfile and
> the various patches included in that packages.  Currently the follwing
> kernel packages are prvovided (others are of course welcome):
>
> 	Caldera OpenLinux 3.1 (linux-2.4.2-11)
> 	Red Hat Linux 7.1 (kernel-2.4.2-2)
>
> Please take a look at http://www.kernelnewbies.org/kernels/

Please put RH 2.4.3-12 kernel online, instead. I guess that 99% of the
people out there that read lk and/or understand what you did, have little
interest on an outdated kernel package. Of course this applies to
Caldera's kernel updates (if any), too.

.TM.
-- 
      ____/  ____/   /
     /      /       /			Marco Colombo
    ___/  ___  /   /		      Technical Manager
   /          /   /			 ESI s.r.l.
 _____/ _____/  _/		       Colombo@ESI.it

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

[Christoph Hellwig]

On Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 03:09:51PM +0200, Marco Colombo wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 
> >
> > I'd like to announce a the availability of unpacked vendor kernel RPMs
> > on www.kernelnewbies.org.  We allow taking a look at the specfile and
> > the various patches included in that packages.  Currently the follwing
> > kernel packages are prvovided (others are of course welcome):
> >
> > 	Caldera OpenLinux 3.1 (linux-2.4.2-11)
> > 	Red Hat Linux 7.1 (kernel-2.4.2-2)
> >
> > Please take a look at http://www.kernelnewbies.org/kernels/
> 
> Please put RH 2.4.3-12 kernel online, instead. I guess that 99% of the
> people out there that read lk and/or understand what you did, have little
> interest on an outdated kernel package. Of course this applies to
> Caldera's kernel updates (if any), too.

I'm not too happy with that as there are just too many kernel updates in
a product livecycle.

	Christoph

-- 
Of course it doesn't work. We've performed a software upgrade.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

[Dave Jones]

On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> > Please put RH 2.4.3-12 kernel online, instead.
> I'm not too happy with that as there are just too many kernel updates in
> a product livecycle.

Agreed. Just maintaining an archive of 'what kernel was released on which
CD' is enough work already. Adding a ptr to each vendors area of updates
is probably the next thing to add though.

btw: I just added SuSE 7.2 to the list.

regards,

Dave.

-- 
| Dave Jones.        http://www.suse.de/~davej
| SuSE Labs

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

[Marco Colombo]

On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Christoph Hellwig wrote:

> On Fri, Aug 10, 2001 at 03:09:51PM +0200, Marco Colombo wrote:
> > On Fri, 10 Aug 2001, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > I'd like to announce a the availability of unpacked vendor kernel RPMs
> > > on www.kernelnewbies.org.  We allow taking a look at the specfile and
> > > the various patches included in that packages.  Currently the follwing
> > > kernel packages are prvovided (others are of course welcome):
> > >
> > > 	Caldera OpenLinux 3.1 (linux-2.4.2-11)
> > > 	Red Hat Linux 7.1 (kernel-2.4.2-2)
> > >
> > > Please take a look at http://www.kernelnewbies.org/kernels/
> >
> > Please put RH 2.4.3-12 kernel online, instead. I guess that 99% of the
> > people out there that read lk and/or understand what you did, have little
> > interest on an outdated kernel package. Of course this applies to
> > Caldera's kernel updates (if any), too.
>
> I'm not too happy with that as there are just too many kernel updates in
> a product livecycle.

I guess you'll keep the major distro release up to date. These are
the kernel released by RH since 6.2 (not sure of the dates):

kernel-2.2.14-5.0	Mar 2000 - Red Hat 6.2
kernel-2.2.14-12	Apr 2000
kernel-2.2.16-3		Jun 2000

kernel-2.2.16-22	Sep 2000 - Red Hat 7
kernel-2.2.17-1		Feb 2001

kernel-2.4.2-2		Apr 2001 - Red Hat 7.1
kernel-2.4.3-12		Jun 2001

The kernel is a moving target. If you can deal with more than a distribution,
you can deal with 1 or 2 kernel updates per release, IMVHO.

You know, outdated info if useless info.

.TM.
-- 
      ____/  ____/   /
     /      /       /			Marco Colombo
    ___/  ___  /   /		      Technical Manager
   /          /   /			 ESI s.r.l.
 _____/ _____/  _/		       Colombo@ESI.it

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Vendor kernels unpakced

[Horst von Brand]

Marco Colombo <marco@esi.it> said:

[...]

> The kernel is a moving target. If you can deal with more than a distribution,
> you can deal with 1 or 2 kernel updates per release, IMVHO.

Just as it makes no sense to run a not-up-to-date release kernel, it makes
no sense to keep anything but the very last on line. Just MVHO.
-- 
Dr. Horst H. von Brand                Usuario #22616 counter.li.org
Departamento de Informatica                     Fono: +56 32 654431
Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria              +56 32 654239
Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile                Fax:  +56 32 797513