On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Jan de Groot<jan@jgc.homeip.net> wrote:
On Mon, 2009-08-03 at 15:47 +0300, Roman Kyrylych wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 14:13, Daenyth Blank<daenyth+arch@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Aug 3, 2009 at 04:39, Roman Kyrylych<roman.kyrylych@gmail.com> wrote:
I don't really understand why minimal .25 kernel is a problem? Aren't we the bleeding edge distro?
For some virtualized providers (slicehost off the top of my head), they use their own kernel that isn't as up to date. This update would break all such hosted Arch servers.
IgnorePkg? And how often are such hosted Arch servers updated anyway? And we do not support custom kernels officially anyway.
What I'm trying to say is that holding updates because of this is not acceptable IMO.
I didn't say "holding updates", I just wanted to either find a workaround if available so as not to break user systems completely. Ever had to rescue a remote server because sshd didn't come up? Not supporting custom kernels *officially*? Of course. Not supporting custom kernels? Did something change in the past 4 years that I missed? I thought Arch was always a bit of a DIY distro, it's rather shortsighted to assume one kernel fits everyone...
Not updating udev will keep us away from new innovations. For glibc, supporting kernel 2.6.18 means adding some compatibility code. For udev, staying compatible with 2.6.18 means no support for devicekit-* in the near future. People who are forced to use old kernels should just stick to an older udev, or use static /dev. These people will be locked out from new things like devicekit-power and devicekit-disks in the near future, but I assume people running old kernels because of virtualization won't run GNOME or KDE desktops on it.
I'll shoot an email to Slicehost on my behalf to see what kernels they have available. What other VPS providers offer Arch? It isn't a tough thing to find out how much we can get away with here. -Dan