Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932173AbVLCXi2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 18:38:28 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932176AbVLCXi2 (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 18:38:28 -0500 Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:41916 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932173AbVLCXi1 (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Dec 2005 18:38:27 -0500 Date: Sat, 3 Dec 2005 15:35:11 -0800 From: Chris Wright To: Adrian Bunk Cc: Greg KH , Jesper Juhl , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC: Starting a stable kernel series off the 2.6 kernel Message-ID: <20051203233511.GL7991@shell0.pdx.osdl.net> References: <20051203135608.GJ31395@stusta.de> <9a8748490512030629t16d0b9ebv279064245743e001@mail.gmail.com> <20051203201945.GA4182@kroah.com> <20051203225105.GO31395@stusta.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20051203225105.GO31395@stusta.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1748 Lines: 34 * Adrian Bunk (bunk@stusta.de) wrote: > I don't get the point where the advantage is when every distribution > creates it's own stable branches. They often start from a different base. > AFAIR one of the reasons for the current 2.6 development model was to > reduce the amount of feature patches distributions ship by offering an > ftp.kernel.org kernel that gets new features early. > > What's wrong with offering an unified branch with few regressions for > both users and distributions? It's not that every distribution will use > it, but as soon as one or two distributions are using it the amount of > extra work for maintaining the branch should become pretty low. Backporting is real work, and can introduce instabilities of its own. If the goal is to stop breaking userspace ABI, there's no guarantee this will be done via backporting w/out careful inspection, esp. for sysfs and proc entries. More to the point, breaking userspace (I'm not talking about deprecated features) should stop upstream, not only in some frozen branch. If the goal is to make sure old kernels have security fixes, which old kernel branch do you follow, the numbers will only grow. Distros are in a position to look at current -stable updates and see if security fixes are relevant. About the only thing I think is helpful in this case is perhaps one extra -stable cycle on the last branch when newest branch is released (basically flush the queue). That much I'm willing to do in -stable. thanks, -chris - 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/