Kevin Kofler wrote:
Suren Karapetyan wrote:
I'm sure trying to fix them one by one in F10 is WRONG.
Downgrading is what is wrong. The ALSA update fixes bugs for some people and
even adds support for some hardware. Moving back is not the solution,
fixing the update is.
Kevin Kofler
As You see I'm on the other side.
I'm one of many for whom ALSA upgrade introduced the worst bug it could
i.e. it destroyed sound!
Breaking something which works to fix something which doesn't work is
not the right way to go.
Let's take an example.
I have friends Bob and Jane.
He downloaded F10 second day of the release burned it on a DVD and
installed it.
Everything was fine, BUT there was no sound.
He plays with it a few days and switches to something which has sound.
Jane installs F10 and is quite satisfied until the day security update
breaks sound (the same update fixes sound for Bob, but he'll not know it
until F11, cause he is sure F10 is broken).
She has good education and is computer-literate, so she goes to
bugzilla, reports her problems.
Waits for a few days and gets nothing.
Then she calls Bob and asks what he did to fix his problem.
Bob tells her to switch to X.
And now to Your point.
I agree: downgrading is wrong.
But upgrading was even wrongER.
Just look at https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/F10/FEDORA-2008-11593
The new kernel spent ~30 hours in updates-testing.
While it's quite normal for a security fix it's unacceptable for such a
huge change as ALSA upgrade.
And a question to You.
If I become a fedora maintainer and (in some way manage to) upgrade F10
to kernel-2.6.29 are we going to revert my update or try to fix all the
regressions which will take ~2 months.
P.S. 2.6.28 fixes suspend-wakeup issues for my notebook, but I'm not
asking anyone to upgrade F10 to it.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
