Re: [GIT PULL] Performance Counters for Linux

[Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>]

On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 11:17:16PM +0200, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Sam,
> 
> > > So you are saying that only good code comes from including it into
> > > linux-2.6.git and otherwise you will never get there. Have you actually
> > > tried to maintain this in a separate repository on kernel.org?
> > 
> > Could you please remind us what the arguments agains including a few
> > seleted tools within the kernel source tree was.
> > 
> > I ask because I really cannot see why so much nosie is generated?
> > As a naive user that like easy access to the stuff I work with
> > this looks like an optimal place to find the kernel-hacking
> > tools I need. Why should I hunt somewhere else to find it?
> 
> I personally would expect a perf.git on kernel.org for the userspace
> tools for it. Like we have udev.git there, iproute2.git and others.
> 
> Seems to be working perfectly fine (except of course oprofile) and makes
> packaging and security updates a lot easier.
There is nothing preventing us from adding support for rpm and source rpms.
So you just grab the relevant tre and issue a few cammnds and you have your
packages.
And for security fixes we have the stable kernels.

> The distros have always a
> really hard problem with releasing new kernel packages.
There is nothing that say that because the code live inside
the kernel tree you _have_to_ release the full kernel source
to release a tool.

You mix up the fact that the source for the tool live inside the
kernel with the way tools are packaged.

	Sam