Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751292AbVLCVSr (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 16:18:47 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751294AbVLCVSr (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 16:18:47 -0500 Received: from gate.in-addr.de ([212.8.193.158]:14487 "EHLO mx.in-addr.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751292AbVLCVSq (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 16:18:46 -0500 Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 22:18:10 +0100 From: Lars Marowsky-Bree To: Dave Jones , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC: Starting a stable kernel series off the 2.6 kernel Message-ID: <20051203211810.GY18919@marowsky-bree.de> References: <20051203135608.GJ31395@stusta.de> <20051203205911.GX18919@marowsky-bree.de> <20051203211329.GC25015@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20051203211329.GC25015@redhat.com> X-Ctuhulu: HASTUR User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1863 Lines: 46 On 2005-12-03T16:13:29, Dave Jones wrote: > The big problem is though that we don't typically find out that > we've regressed until after a kernel update is in the end-users hands. > > In many cases, submitters of changes know that things are going > to break. Maybe we need a policy that says changes requiring userspace updates > need to be clearly documented in the mails Linus gets (Especially if its > a git pull request), so that when the next point release gets released, > Linus can put a section in the announcement detailing what bits > of userspace are needed to be updated. True, but this first block doesn't really qualify as a "regression". Yes, a clearer-than-crystal documentation of "this kernel requires user-space component foo to be at least x.y.z if feature bar is used" would go a long way. And if then user-space itself was tolerant of at least version N and N-1, then users could even roll back one kernel version if problems arise. Both of these are documentation and user-space issues, and don't much depend on changes to kernel development model. > It still isn't to solve the problem of regressions in drivers, but > that's a problem that's not easily solvable. True. Regressions will always occur when driver updates happen. There'll always be the next bug. I don't think anyone introduces these on purpose ;-) Sincerely, Lars Marowsky-Br?e -- High Availability & Clustering SUSE Labs, Research and Development SUSE LINUX Products GmbH - A Novell Business -- Charles Darwin "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge" - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/