Hi, On 17/08/12 11:56, Robert Millan wrote: >> [...] It seems likely we would want to release 9.1 >> through t-p-u, for the first point release after wheezy. [...] > > It's harder than it looks. It wouldn't surprise me if this forced > upgrade of userland part of the stack too, like transition to 9.0 did.
Okay then. I guess we could try to offer 9.1 through wheezy-backports, along with any new versions of userland tools needed to make it usable. And we might be able to backport a few bits into 9.0 in wheezy if needed. Starting with the #683739 fix needed for haxe of course, if it doesn't make the release. I had a problem with bge(4) crashing a box every few days (BCM5703 only when used on a AMD-8131 PCI-X controller as in the Sun Fire v20z). There were small patches committed to 9.0-STABLE that seem to have fixed it. I guess this type of thing would be much easier to get into s-p-u? And I think I recall Christoph having trouble with ixgbe(4). But the ixgbe changeset from 9.0 to 9.1 is huge (new driver version from upstream). For this sort of thing, I think it would be convenient if a 9.1 backport was available to users. Regards, -- Steven Chamberlain ste...@pyro.eu.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bsd-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/502e2c6c.5020...@pyro.eu.org
