Steve Langasek <steve.langa...@canonical.com> writes: > I don't think we would want to accept a wholesale update, even with > added userspace test cases. The previous SRU upload was based on a > package *not* intended for a stable release update; it includes many > changes that are clearly appropriate to make in a development release in > preparation for the next stable release, but just identifying an > appropriate set of test cases for all of the userspace changes > (including the packaging changes) would be far more time-consuming than > just cherry-picking the necessary kernel changes.
I will say that this is the serious problem with accepting new kernels into a stable release. If you accept a new kernel version but don't accept new upstream releases of all the separately-packaged kernel modules, you basically break all those packages for stable users. I had that concern when Debian was talking about doing the same thing in stable releases. You can require backporting of just the kernel compilation fixes, but often that's quite a lot of work and it ends up just not happening, so the packages just stay broken for users. It doesn't affect me directly, of course, since I don't use Ubuntu, and y'all should certainly feel free to decide on the strategy that works for your community, but it might be an interesting data point that this was one of my arguments against supporting Ubuntu internally in my group when we had that discussion internally a couple of weeks ago. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1206387 Title: openafs-modules-dkms 1.6.1-1+ubuntu0.2: module FTBFS on 3.8.0 To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/openafs/+bug/1206387/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
