On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Bruno Wolff III <bruno@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:30:37 -0800, > Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> >> FWIW the ship has probably sailed now, but I really don't think it'd be >> much of a problem to have 3.12 in F20 at release time. It's what I've >> been running on my F20 box here for the last several weeks anyway, and >> based on my testing it's unlikely to cause us any particular problems. > > > I asked about this last week and the kernel devs didn't feel comfortable > about switching after beta or trying to get a freeze exception to get 3.12 > into beta. Right. Also, at this point I'm not sure what 3.12 actually buys us over a known 3.11. > I run rawhide nodebug kernels on three machines and am not seeing any > regressions relative to 3.11. Are you running any ARM machines? My understanding is that our F20 kernel has patches that enable important ARM stuff that isn't in rawhide (3.12) because it was conflicting with the churn. So that would need to be added and tested, given ARM is primary on F20. josh _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
