[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Upgrade to fc2

Lamont R. Peterson wrote:
> Speaking of SELinux with FC2, I would like to see FC2 ship a 2.4 
> kernel with enough SELinux support built in so as to not hose up 
> the system for the installed 2.6 kernel(s).

> Personally, I do not plan on utilizing such a kernel, except during the
> test series of releases.  However, I think there may be several people
> who would want to be able to run both 2.4 and 2.6 kernels during a
> "transition" period of their choosing.

This opinion about dual shipping 2.4 and 2.6 has been expressed
repeatedly, and personally i think at this point, its a dead horse.
Shipping 2 kernels greatly complicates ANY bugreporting and demands
on developer time after the release in terms of fixing problems.  And
it's pointless to use the argument that Core developers should just
throw the community a bone, and ship a 2.4 kernel even if they don't
have the time to commit to keeping both kernels 'working' during the
lifetime of product. Shipping pieces of Core, without being able to
commit to keeping it updated through the Core release lifetime..is
frankly...irresponsible. Not shipping both kernels, is recognition of
the constraints on doing quality distro integration/maintenance. Core is
NOT a "throw it over the fence" collection of software.

And to think about it another way...for FC2 to ship with a 2.4
kernel..FC2 test releases would have to ship with a 2.4 kernel for
testing...if test releases ship with a 2.4 kernel..thats less testing
focus for the 2.6 kernel. Divided testing effort during the
releases..means more bugs and problems make it through to the release
for both kernels...everyone ends up unhappy.

Barring a serious meltdown...2.6 kernel is THE kernel for FC2, everyone
concerned about what that means in terms of moving systems over the FC2
better do all they can to use the test releases, every single one of
them, to find serious problems and report them.  The earlier you find a
serious 2.6 kernel related bug, the quicker developers can work through
their priority list and get to it.  Having a 2.4 kernel hanging around
for everyone to easily get at..is a distraction/drain to both testing
and to post release maintenance.

-jef"time to face the music...and buy a new crash helmet"spaleta

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]