David Woodhouse wrote:
On Thu, 2007-07-26 at 11:59 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 17:48:57 +0200
Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx> wrote:
I must say I like this approach, it avoids the whole problem of
having to rebuild kmods all the time and of wether to delay kernel
security updates until all kmods are fixetd etc. I do think however
that this might cause some pain for Dave Jones, whose job already is
hard. Maybe we should ask him what he thinks about this?
Well, if the module doesn't build fine with an update, most likely
what's going to happen is the module gets disabled, which could result
in even more frequent kernel updates just for getting a single module
to build again.
I assume you're thinking of updates, not rawhide. In rawhide, Dave or
Chuck send you a mail saying "your $FOO patch broke; I turned it off".
You fix it, and it appears again in rawhide in a day or two.
In updates, such things are actually much less likely to break, except
when we rebase to a newer kernel -- and if you've kept your driver
working in rawhide then it should work fine when we rebase the release
to the newer kernel anyway. Even if not, we tend to be quite
conservative about releasing new kernels anyway -- they end up in
updates-testing for some time, and that gives you time to get it
working. The urgent security fixes are usually relatively small and
unlikely to break drivers.
That sounds an excellent way of handling this, can I say +1
Regards,
Hans
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
