On Mar 10, 2009, at 9:48 AM, Jeremy Katz wrote:
On Tuesday, March 10 2009, Christoph Wickert said:
Am Dienstag, den 10.03.2009, 15:21 +0530 schrieb Rahul Sundaram:
Christoph Wickert wrote:
A note to all Fedora maintainers and especially to the Red Hat
people
who are involved in development every day:
Please fix your bugs [1] in the release they were
filed against instead of just closing them NEXTRELASE!
Doesn't that depend on how serious the bugs are? Sometimes
upstream has
gone way ahead, changed their configuration format etc and
backporting
the fix or just pushing the update with all the other changes is too
invasive.
Agreed, but in the case I have in mind
* the bug is so serious that he makes the package not working
* we are upstream and
* there is nothing to backport. Nevertheless the maintainer told
me to get the rawhide package.
So, as the person who has apparently pissed you off this morning, it's
not as trivial as you're making it out to be. I'm sorry that you want
to be doing the development of the live images for the next release on
Fedora 10, but the fact of the matter is that as the base system of
Fedora moves onward, it's not just a foregone conclusion that
everything
can be done on the previous release. Yes, I could push back the
single
patch for the syslinux path change... but that *isn't* sufficient to
make a working rawhide live image while on Fedora 10. You also need
things like a) a newer kernel so that your system doesn't livelock
while
writing to ext4 b) a newer squashfs-tools so that you can build an
image
that works with the rawhide kernel[1] c) one or two other things are a
little different and could have side effects -- sure, those could be
tested extensively and dealt with/fixed/whatnot. But that's then
effort
not spent on implementing things for the future. And given the
intended
audience of livecd-tools, that's really not the best use of effort.
Jeremy
[1] And this one is even more insidious because the new mksquashfs
won't
build an image that works with old kernels... so we push it back to
F10
and all of sudden, building F10 images breaks for people.
Is the squashfs change the holdup on getting 2.6.29 in F10? Last time
I tried the koji 2.6.29 F10 kernel, this was an issue in doing a
custom application respin.
joe
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
