[arch-dev-public] [signoff] kernel26-lts 2.6.32.12-1
Hi guys, first try of lts bump to .32 series: - udev-compat is not needed anymore for this kernel - updated lts config to this kernel series - lzma compression is now used With this LTS release, i want to provide binary kernel modules too. Shall the binary modules be part of [core] then too, if the kernel26 module is there too? Thanks for feedback and input. Please signoff both arches, greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
Am Thu, 6 May 2010 19:06:53 +0200
schrieb Tobias Powalowski
Hi guys, first try of lts bump to .32 series: - udev-compat is not needed anymore for this kernel - updated lts config to this kernel series - lzma compression is now used
With this LTS release, i want to provide binary kernel modules too. Shall the binary modules be part of [core] then too, if the kernel26 module is there too? Thanks for feedback and input.
Please signoff both arches, greetings tpowa
Packages are not yet in the repos. You probably missed to run the testing db script. One major objection: CONFIG_LOCALVERSION="-lts" changed to CONFIG_LOCALVERSION="-ARCH" Shouldn't this produce file conflicts and trouble for the install script? A quick check of all the other kernel configuration options looks ok to me. I have no objection to move the modules to the same place where they belong for the stock Arch kernel. I have no real opinion about the graphics modules because they will probably soon fail to run with future libdrm/Xorg versions. But its main propose should be server usage and fallback anyways. -Andy
Gcc 4.5 is the breaker. I've pushed a -2 pkg to testing. Please give it a try. -Andy
On 05/09/2010 08:57 PM, Andreas Radke wrote:
Gcc 4.5 is the breaker. I've pushed a -2 pkg to testing. Please give it a try.
-Andy
this is working fine. I noticed that this kernel has the tux logo instead of arch. Is this intentional? -- Ionut
Am Sun, 09 May 2010 21:04:40 +0300
schrieb Ionut Biru
On 05/09/2010 08:57 PM, Andreas Radke wrote:
Gcc 4.5 is the breaker. I've pushed a -2 pkg to testing. Please give it a try.
-Andy
this is working fine. I noticed that this kernel has the tux logo instead of arch. Is this intentional?
Yes, The old one also had everything plain upstream. LTS should stay as vanilla as possible. -Andy
upstream update 2.6.32.13. our gcc4.5 patch went upstream. -Andy
Am Thu, 13 May 2010 16:37:49 +0200
schrieb Andreas Radke
upstream update 2.6.32.13. our gcc4.5 patch went upstream.
-Andy
Since I've updated my server from .27 lts kernel to .32 series I've run into a small but annoying issue. I'm running nfs v3 nothing special. my options in /etc/exports: /path/to/share IP(rw,async,no_root_squash) OpenOffice is no more able to open files in writable mode. Somehow the server fails to lock the file properly and OOo refuses to safe files / refused to open files in writable mode. It seems there have been file locking issues in the past with OOo and some other apps http://www.crazysquirrel.com/computing/debian/bugs/openoffice-over-nfs.jspx It happens with our Arch OOo pkg and also with a client running Ubuntu Lucid here. I'd rather like to fix this and don't want to step up to nfs v4 right now. Can somebody confirm my locking issue and that it's caused by .32 kernels? Any idea how to solve it? -Andy
2.6.32.14-1 in testing. I'd like to see this one soon moving. Please someone give signoffs. -Andy
On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 5:00 PM, Andreas Radke
2.6.32.14-1 in testing.
I'd like to see this one soon moving. Please someone give signoffs.
-Andy
no tested in depth but system booted fine. signoff i686
next one: 2.6.32.15-1, added some TCP modules requested in #19604 please signoff. .Andy
participants (4)
-
Andreas Radke
-
Eric Bélanger
-
Ionut Biru
-
Tobias Powalowski