On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 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. > > The main issue here is BBBlack rebasing which I've started to do (not > sure if kyle has looked at this at all) but as it stands the BBB on > 3.11 has issues with USB/Display anyway so from this PoV it shouldn't > be hard to get us to as good as or better experience with 3.12 on the > BBBlack. The advantage of moving to 3.12 from the ARM PoV would be a > much better and expanded experience from the i.MX PoV which covers > Utilite and Wandboard which are some of our best working devices at > the moment and it would improve that experience greatly. Has there been a set of devices decided as blocking for F20? Are any of those you mentioned in that set? I don't want to go add more devices people have to test at this point. > From my PoV I'm certainly not opposed to moving to 3.12 from the ARM > side of things. That's good to know, but I'm still uncomfortable doing it post-Beta. I don't see how that would be reasonable, but I'm willing to be enlightened. josh -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
