W dniu 30 czerwca 2011 20:58 użytkownik Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx> napisał: > On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 08:50:17PM +0200, Michał Piotrowski wrote: > > Hi, > > > > 2011/6/30 Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx>: > > > I've just pushed a f15-2.6.39 branch which contains a work in progress rebase. > > > The only thing that I'm really concerned about in this right now is X regressions. > > > We had a drm-next backport to .38 and moving that to .39 turned up a ton of rejects. > > > I fixed up a few by hand, but the resulting compile failures made my head hurt, so > > > I've mostly left them disabled. If the nouveau/intel drm dudes could look over > > > that branch and fix up whatever is necessary, we can look at getting this out > > > to people soon. > > > > > > (looking ahead, after its release pushing 3.0.x as 2.6.40 is probably going to > > > happen, > > > > I ask out of curiosity - why 2.6.40? Is it a big problem to run 3.0 on F15? > > A lot of broken software is assuming version numbers are 2.6.x. We could push a load > of userspace packages to fix it, but that's just the stuff we control. 3rd party add-ons > would break for no good reason. > > This deviates from what upstream calls it, but it's just a number, and not breaking > existing code in an update is more important here. Of course you are absolutely right at this point :) Thanks for your answer. > For f16 of course, we'll make > the 3.0 transition, because moving to a new release has differing expectations, > and by the time it ships, hopefully everything that cares will be fixed. > > Dave > -- Best regards, Michal http://eventhorizon.pl/ _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel