linux-kernel - Re: [stable] [Stable-review] Future of the -longterm kernel releases (i.e. how we pick them).

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20110816025625.GA6511@kroah.com>
Date:	Mon, 15 Aug 2011 19:56:25 -0700
From:	Greg KH <greg@...ah.com>
To:	Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>
Cc:	david@...g.hm, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	stable-review@...nel.org, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, stable@...nel.org,
	alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk
Subject: Re: [stable] [Stable-review] Future of the -longterm kernel releases
 (i.e. how we pick them).

On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 03:26:56AM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 07:21 -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 12:21:59AM -0700, david@...g.hm wrote:
> > > rather than having a hard schedule (the first kernel released after
> > > July 1 each year for example I know this is not the exact proposal),
> > > I think that it would be better to pick the -longterm kernel a few
> > > months after it has been released (3.4 is looking very good, the
> > > normal minor driver fixes in -stable, but no fundamental regressions
> > > have been reported, it's the new -longerm kernel for example)
> > > 
> > > doing so doesn't give the predictability that some people will want
> > > in knowing that their September release will always have a fresh new
> > > -longerm kernel, but I think the result would be better -longterm
> > > kernels. However, to get the information about how good the kernels
> > > are, I think that the -stable timeframe would need to be extended to
> > > give the kernels time to settle and gather reports. I would then
> > > suggest scheduling that once a year you look at the last couple
> > > -stable kernels and pick one of them rather than designating the new
> > > -longterm kernel ahead of time.
> > 
> > Yes, that's a very good idea.  I've seen problems in the past when
> > distros have made a time-based decision to pick a kernel version and
> > then the problems that this can cause if it happens that a subsystem
> > really had issues for that release.
> > 
> > So yes, I'll take a look at the bug reports and how things are working
> > out to pick the next -longterm.  I'll also take into consideration any
> > companies/major users that are going to be using that release as well,
> > so it greatly behooves people to talk to me about their plans (hint,
> > hint...)
> [...]
> 
> This might be a good discussion to have at Kernel Summit, if enough
> distro people are going to be there.

I doubt the proper distro people will be at the Kernel Summit, sorry.
Perhaps at Plumbers or at LinuxCon Europe?

greg k-h
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/