Re: [kernel.org users] XZ Migration discussion

["Justin P. Mattock" <justinmattock@gmail.com>]

On 02/14/10 01:32, Jean Delvare wrote:
> Hi Phillip,
>
> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 22:37:41 +0000, Phillip Lougher wrote:
>> Embedded and enterprise distro users are usually stuck on ancient kernels that
>> were downloaded from kernel.org and patched *years ago*.  The reason they're
>> stuck on them is due to local modifications, and so they're not going to be
>> downloading ancient vanilla kernels from kernel.org now.
>
> They perfectly could. This is exactly what we're doing at Suse and I can
> easily imagine other companies follow the same model. We store our
> local changes as patches on top of the old kernel version. When a new
> developer joins the team and needs to setup a working tree, our setup
> script gets the patches from our internal repository, fetches the
> relevant kernel tarball from kernel.org, unpacks it and applies all the
> patches.
>
> This is one of the reasons why others have been claiming in this
> discussion: it would be weird if files which were previously available
> would suddenly disappear. We can discuss the cost and benefits of any
> change done to the tree structure, compression formats etc. but please
> do not assume that nobody is downloading the old files from kernel.org.
>
> Personally I wouldn't mind at all if old files would disappear and our
> tools have to be adjusted accordingly, as long as it happens only once
> in a long while and not on a regular basis by (broken) design.
>


not trying to cut in, but the best example I can see for this
(hopefully), or a good example of just changing everything
(cut the middle man per say)is libc there is no libc-2.11.90.so 
.tar.gz(etc..)only through git(but could be wrong).

My system that I built is only handling everything(meaning every package 
as much as possible)through git.


Justin P. Mattock