Re: Linux kernel version for jessie

On Fri, 2014-08-01 at 10:35 +1000, Russell Coker wrote: > On Thu, 31 Jul 2014 16:35:55 Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > I'm thinking of filing a bug report against the Debian-installer > > > package to warn people about BTRFS. I don't believe that BTRFS in 3.15 > > > is suitable for a typical Debian user

Re: Linux kernel version for jessie

On Thu, 31 Jul 2014 16:35:55 Ben Hutchings wrote: > > I'm thinking of filing a bug report against the Debian-installer > > package to warn people about BTRFS. I don't believe that BTRFS in 3.15 > > is suitable for a typical Debian user and I don't know how good 3.16 > > will be. > > Do you think s

Re: Linux kernel version for jessie

On Thu, 2014-07-31 at 20:08 +1000, Russell Coker wrote: > On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 16:32:55 Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > This will be Linux 3.16, due to be released in early > August. Release > > > candidates for Linux 3.16 are already packaged and available in the > > > experimental suite. > > >

Re: Linux kernel version for jessie

On Wed, 30 Jul 2014 16:32:55 Ben Hutchings wrote: > This will be Linux 3.16, due to be released in early August. Release > candidates for Linux 3.16 are already packaged and available in the > experimental suite. Do you plan to back-port BTRFS changes to 3.16? I'm thinking of filing a bug report

Linux kernel version for jessie

The Debian Linux kernel team has discussed and chosen the kernel version to use as a basis for Debian 8 'jessie'. This will be Linux 3.16, due to be released in early August. Release candidates for Linux 3.16 are already packaged and available in the experimental suite. If you maintain a package

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 17:43 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: [...] > So we have a choice between: > > Linux 3.14-stable > - Supported by Greg for about 2 years after release (March 2014) > - As an official kernel.org branch, it is likely to get some more > testing and review, and more backports from

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Sun, Jul 20, 2014 at 11:39:15PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 17:43 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > [...] > > Linux 3.16-stable > > - Supported by Ubuntu kernel team for about 15-18 months after distro > > release (October 2014) > [...] > > Note, that period is based on it

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 17:43 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: [...] > Linux 3.16-stable > - Supported by Ubuntu kernel team for about 15-18 months after distro > release (October 2014) [...] Note, that period is based on it being provided as an alternate kernel for Ubuntu 14.04 LTS. My understanding

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Sun, 2014-07-20 at 01:44 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 22:19 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > > OOI who is it that is going to be basing on 3.14? > > I don't know specifically, but he implied that consumer electronics > companies would be using it in a lot of products. Thanks

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 22:19 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 17:43 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 17:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > [...] > > > The earlier we freeze the kernel, the more work will be required to > > > backport fixes and hardware enableme

Re: Kernel version for jessie

Ben Hutchings schrieb: > Ubuntu 14.10 is planned to use Linux 3.16, in which case Ubuntu will > maintain a 3.16-stable branch (not blessed by kernel.org, but still > following the same rules). > > So we have a choice between: > > Linux 3.14-stable > - Supported by Greg for about 2 years after rele

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 05:43:06PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 17:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > [...] > > The earlier we freeze the kernel, the more work will be required to > > backport fixes and hardware enablement during the jessie support period. > > So I think that 3

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 22:41 +0200, maximilian attems wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 05:43:06PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 17:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > > > Linux 3.14-stable > > - Supported by Greg for about 2 years after release (March 2014) > > - As an offici

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Fri, 2014-07-18 at 17:43 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 17:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > [...] > > The earlier we freeze the kernel, the more work will be required to > > backport fixes and hardware enablement during the jessie support period. > > So I think that 3.16 wou

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Fri, Jul 18, 2014 at 05:43:06PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 17:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > > Linux 3.14-stable > - Supported by Greg for about 2 years after release (March 2014) > - As an official kernel.org branch, it is likely to get some more > testing and revi

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 17:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: [...] > The earlier we freeze the kernel, the more work will be required to > backport fixes and hardware enablement during the jessie support period. > So I think that 3.16 would be the best fit. > > It is also very unlikely that a PREEMPT_R

Re: Kernel version for jessie

Ben Hutchings schrieb: > > --=-7K30lQ4BLoJ3LSF2G3VV > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > > Based on a linear regression of Linux release dates since 3.2, I > extrapolated that the latest stable release at freeze time will likely > be 3.17:

Re: Kernel version for jessie

On Thu, 2014-05-01 at 17:29 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote: > Based on a linear regression of Linux release dates since 3.2, I > extrapolated that the latest stable release at freeze time will likely > be 3.17: . > However, there will be littl

Kernel version for jessie

Based on a linear regression of Linux release dates since 3.2, I extrapolated that the latest stable release at freeze time will likely be 3.17: . However, there will be little time for any necessary but disruptive fixes or packaging chang