Le Mer 6 novembre 2013 21:39, Bruno Wolff III a écrit :
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:30:37 -0800,
>Adam Williamson 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 F
On Nov 6, 2013, at 1:37 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 08:00 -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
>>> We have a slight issue with the 3.12 kernel timing in that it is too
>>> late to push it into Fedora 20, but too far away from
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 4:16 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 15:37 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
>> > On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 08:00 -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
>> >> We have a slight issue with the 3.12 kernel timing in that
On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 15:42 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:30:37 -0800,
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> FWIW the ship has probably sailed now, but I really don't think it'd be
> >> much of a problem to h
On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 15:37 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 08:00 -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
> >> We have a slight issue with the 3.12 kernel timing in that it is too
> >> late to push it into Fedora 20, but too far aw
>>> 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 issu
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>>> On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:30:37 -0800,
>>> Adam Williamson wrote:
FWIW the ship has probably sailed now, but
>> 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.
>
>
> Not with 3.12. Th
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:30:37 -0800,
>> Adam Williamson 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
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 15:42:56 -0500,
Josh Boyer wrote:
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,
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:30:37 -0800,
> Adam Williamson 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
Am 06.11.2013 21:37, schrieb Josh Boyer:
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Adam Williamson 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 se
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:30:37 -0800,
Adam Williamson 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 testi
On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 08:00 -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
>> We have a slight issue with the 3.12 kernel timing in that it is too
>> late to push it into Fedora 20, but too far away from the Fedora 20
>> release to just ignore the 3.13 deve
On Wed, 2013-11-06 at 08:00 -0600, Justin M. Forbes wrote:
> We have a slight issue with the 3.12 kernel timing in that it is too
> late to push it into Fedora 20, but too far away from the Fedora 20
> release to just ignore the 3.13 development cycle until we can push
> 3.12. As a result, we will
On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 08:00:33 -0600,
"Justin M. Forbes" wrote:
We have a slight issue with the 3.12 kernel timing in that it is too
late to push it into Fedora 20, but too far away from the Fedora 20
release to just ignore the 3.13 development cycle until we can push
3.12. As a result, we w
We have a slight issue with the 3.12 kernel timing in that it is too
late to push it into Fedora 20, but too far away from the Fedora 20
release to just ignore the 3.13 development cycle until we can push
3.12. As a result, we will be tracking 3.12 and stable updates for it in
the rawhide-nodebug r
17 matches
Mail list logo
