Testing RC kernels

Testing RC kernels

[Sean Bruno]

<noob question>

I have been trying to test the 2.6.13 and can't quite get the patches
applied cleanly.

What kernel version (full kernel source tar ball) should I be using to
apply the patches(rc5) with?  Is it 2.6.12.3?

</noob question>

Sean

Re: Testing RC kernels

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:33 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> <noob question>
> 
> I have been trying to test the 2.6.13 and can't quite get the patches
> applied cleanly.
> 
> What kernel version (full kernel source tar ball) should I be using to
> apply the patches(rc5) with?  Is it 2.6.12.3?

No, 2.6.12.

Lee

Re: Testing RC kernels

[Sean Bruno]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 14:36 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:33 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> > <noob question>
> > 
> > I have been trying to test the 2.6.13 and can't quite get the patches
> > applied cleanly.
> > 
> > What kernel version (full kernel source tar ball) should I be using to
> > apply the patches(rc5) with?  Is it 2.6.12.3?
> 
> No, 2.6.12.
> 
> Lee
> 

Ah!  Thanks.

Sean

Re: Testing RC kernels

[Michael Krufky]

Sean Bruno wrote:

><noob question>
>
>I have been trying to test the 2.6.13 and can't quite get the patches
>applied cleanly.
>
>What kernel version (full kernel source tar ball) should I be using to
>apply the patches(rc5) with?  Is it 2.6.12.3?
>
></noob question>
>

2.6.13-rc* patches apply against 2.6.12  NOT 2.6.12.x

-- 
Michael Krufky

Re: Testing RC kernels

[Lee Revell]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:36 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 14:36 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:33 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> > > <noob question>
> > > 
> > > I have been trying to test the 2.6.13 and can't quite get the patches
> > > applied cleanly.
> > > 
> > > What kernel version (full kernel source tar ball) should I be using to
> > > apply the patches(rc5) with?  Is it 2.6.12.3?
> > 
> > No, 2.6.12.
> > 
> > Lee
> > 
> 
> Ah!  Thanks.

Thanks for testing the RCs, we need more users to do that.

If any of your hardware stops working, make sure to report it, don't
assume that it will fix itself!  Assume you're the first to notice the
bug.

Lee

Re: Testing RC kernels [KORG]

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 14:54 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:36 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 14:36 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:33 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> > > > <noob question>
> > > > 
> > > > I have been trying to test the 2.6.13 and can't quite get the patches
> > > > applied cleanly.
> > > > 
> > > > What kernel version (full kernel source tar ball) should I be using to
> > > > apply the patches(rc5) with?  Is it 2.6.12.3?
> > > 
> > > No, 2.6.12.
> > > 
> > > Lee
> > > 
> > 
> > Ah!  Thanks.
> 
> Thanks for testing the RCs, we need more users to do that.
> 
> If any of your hardware stops working, make sure to report it, don't
> assume that it will fix itself!  Assume you're the first to notice the
> bug.

I've been complaining about this for some time. Kernel.org really needs
to show more information about the rc kernels and how to create them.
We want more testers, but I wonder how many people go through the above
steps and just give up when things don't work. Luckly Sean was nice
enough to email the LKML and ask.

My main gripe is that there's no link to 2.6.12 which is what most of
the other patches go against.

-- Steve

Re: Testing RC kernels [KORG]

[Sean Bruno]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 15:21 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:

> I've been complaining about this for some time. Kernel.org really needs
> to show more information about the rc kernels and how to create them.
> We want more testers, but I wonder how many people go through the above
> steps and just give up when things don't work. Luckly Sean was nice
> enough to email the LKML and ask.
> 
> My main gripe is that there's no link to 2.6.12 which is what most of
> the other patches go against.
> 
I would be more than willing to whip up an html how-to(and maintain it).
Is there any interest in this?

Sean

Re: Testing RC kernels [KORG]

[Michael Krufky]

Sean Bruno wrote:

>On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 15:21 -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>
>>I've been complaining about this for some time. Kernel.org really needs
>>to show more information about the rc kernels and how to create them.
>>We want more testers, but I wonder how many people go through the above
>>steps and just give up when things don't work. Luckly Sean was nice
>>enough to email the LKML and ask.
>>
>>My main gripe is that there's no link to 2.6.12 which is what most of
>>the other patches go against.
>>
>I would be more than willing to whip up an html how-to(and maintain it).
>Is there any interest in this?
>
>Sean
>  
>
That's not the issue... The issue is that there isn't a direct link to 
download the 2.6.12 source from www.kernel.org homepage... However, the 
-rc patches need to be applied against 2.6.12, so this should *really* 
be linked to from the kernel.org website, in a place that is easy to see 
without too much trouble. (perhaps, directly above, or directly below 
2.6.12.x)

-- 
Michael Krufky

Re: Testing RC kernels [KORG]

[Gene Heskett]

On Tuesday 02 August 2005 15:21, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 14:54 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
>> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:36 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
>> > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 14:36 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
>> > > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:33 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
>> > > > <noob question>
>> > > >
>> > > > I have been trying to test the 2.6.13 and can't quite get
>> > > > the patches applied cleanly.
>> > > >
>> > > > What kernel version (full kernel source tar ball) should I
>> > > > be using to apply the patches(rc5) with?  Is it 2.6.12.3?
>> > >
>> > > No, 2.6.12.
>> > >
>> > > Lee
>> >
>> > Ah!  Thanks.
>>
>> Thanks for testing the RCs, we need more users to do that.
>>
>> If any of your hardware stops working, make sure to report it,
>> don't assume that it will fix itself!  Assume you're the first to
>> notice the bug.
>
>I've been complaining about this for some time. Kernel.org really
> needs to show more information about the rc kernels and how to
> create them. We want more testers, but I wonder how many people go
> through the above steps and just give up when things don't work.
> Luckly Sean was nice enough to email the LKML and ask.
>
>My main gripe is that there's no link to 2.6.12 which is what most
> of the other patches go against.

Can someone with access to the html for kernel.org please fix that?  
We've had several messages now complaining about this.

FWIW, gftp users CAN find it, its sitting right in 
the /pub/linux/kernel/2.6 directory in plain sight.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.35% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.

Re: Testing RC kernels [KORG]

[Randy.Dunlap]

On Tue, 02 Aug 2005 22:04:16 -0400 Gene Heskett wrote:

> On Tuesday 02 August 2005 15:21, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> >On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 14:54 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> >> On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:36 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> >> > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 14:36 -0400, Lee Revell wrote:
> >> > > On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 11:33 -0700, Sean Bruno wrote:
> >> > > > <noob question>
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I have been trying to test the 2.6.13 and can't quite get
> >> > > > the patches applied cleanly.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > What kernel version (full kernel source tar ball) should I
> >> > > > be using to apply the patches(rc5) with?  Is it 2.6.12.3?
> >> > >
> >> > > No, 2.6.12.
> >> > >
> >> > > Lee
> >> >
> >> > Ah!  Thanks.
> >>
> >> Thanks for testing the RCs, we need more users to do that.
> >>
> >> If any of your hardware stops working, make sure to report it,
> >> don't assume that it will fix itself!  Assume you're the first to
> >> notice the bug.
> >
> >I've been complaining about this for some time. Kernel.org really
> > needs to show more information about the rc kernels and how to
> > create them. We want more testers, but I wonder how many people go
> > through the above steps and just give up when things don't work.
> > Luckly Sean was nice enough to email the LKML and ask.
> >
> >My main gripe is that there's no link to 2.6.12 which is what most
> > of the other patches go against.
> 
> Can someone with access to the html for kernel.org please fix that?  
> We've had several messages now complaining about this.

Was the request cc-ed to webmaster@kernel.org (along with
the [KORG] in the subject line)?
I can't tell from the email archives.

> FWIW, gftp users CAN find it, its sitting right in 
> the /pub/linux/kernel/2.6 directory in plain sight.

Sure, anyone can find it if they search enough subdirectories
and know what they are looking for.

---
~Randy

Re: Testing RC kernels [KORG]

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue, 2005-08-02 at 19:13 -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> 
> Was the request cc-ed to webmaster@kernel.org (along with
> the [KORG] in the subject line)?
> I can't tell from the email archives.

Yep, my first (and only?) post on this CC'ed webmaster@kernel.org and I
added [KORG] to the subject. Hopefully it works when it's not first, I
didn't want to screw up people's threads too much.

-- Steve

Re: Testing RC kernels [KORG]

[Gene Heskett]

On Tuesday 02 August 2005 22:13, Randy.Dunlap wrote:

>> >I've been complaining about this for some time. Kernel.org really
>> > needs to show more information about the rc kernels and how to
>> > create them. We want more testers, but I wonder how many people
>> > go through the above steps and just give up when things don't
>> > work. Luckly Sean was nice enough to email the LKML and ask.
>> >
>> >My main gripe is that there's no link to 2.6.12 which is what
>> > most of the other patches go against.
>>
>> Can someone with access to the html for kernel.org please fix
>> that? We've had several messages now complaining about this.
>
>Was the request cc-ed to webmaster@kernel.org (along with
>the [KORG] in the subject line)?
>I can't tell from the email archives.

It is as of this message Randy.

>> FWIW, gftp users CAN find it, its sitting right in
>> the /pub/linux/kernel/2.6 directory in plain sight.
>
>Sure, anyone can find it if they search enough subdirectories
>and know what they are looking for.

And my point is that anyone with the skills to build a kernel 
shouldn't have any problems at all find it with gftp.  It comes with 
a pre-canned set of bookmarks that include ftp.kernel.org.

>---
>~Randy

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
99.35% setiathome rank, not too shabby for a WV hillbilly
Yahoo.com and AOL/TW attorneys please note, additions to the above
message by Gene Heskett are:
Copyright 2005 by Maurice Eugene Heskett, all rights reserved.

Re: Testing RC kernels

[Jiri Slaby]

Michael Krufky napsal(a):

> 2.6.13-rc* patches apply against 2.6.12  NOT 2.6.12.x

The best way to find out this, is to look into patch file on
--- linux-2.6.13-rc4/Makefile
line, a few lines below is -old version (to patch) and +new version as 
result ;).

Re: Testing RC kernels [KORG]

[Andrew James Wade]

On August 2, 2005 11:30 pm, Gene Heskett wrote:
> And my point is that anyone with the skills to build a kernel 
> shouldn't have any problems at all find it with gftp.

I updated my kernel more frequently after learning of ketchup.
(<http://www.selenic.com/ketchup/>). The bother of getting the
patch sequence right and applying it was enough to discourage me.
No, it's not particularly difficult, but it may well be enough
to discourage casual testers. 

Posting a link to ketchup on kernel.org may also decrease the
bandwidth demand, as it seems to be pretty intelligent about
using patches.

Re: Testing RC kernels [KORG]

[John Stoffel]

>>>>> "Andrew" == Andrew James Wade <andrew.j.wade@gmail.com> writes:

Andrew> I updated my kernel more frequently after learning of ketchup.
Andrew> (<http://www.selenic.com/ketchup/>). The bother of getting the
Andrew> patch sequence right and applying it was enough to discourage me.
Andrew> No, it's not particularly difficult, but it may well be enough
Andrew> to discourage casual testers. 

Hear hear!  Ketchup is an amazing tool and automates a boring task, so
it's got my vote for most useful kernel build tool right now.

John