[arch-dev-public] Kernel - vanilla vs patched?

[James Rayner]

On Tue, November 13, 2007 07:54, Aaron Griffin wrote:
> On Nov 12, 2007 1:42 PM, Alexander Baldeck <kth5 at archlinuxppc.org> wrote:
>> I was never even near being worried about Tobias' decisions for
>> kernel26. Most times when I actually touched the PKGBUILD was to get a
>> rc-kernel up on my machine to try it out. Now that I have .24-rc2
>> running here, I have to say that if it weren't for Tobias' work, I
>> wouldn't have a working system to this day. Even though I don't know
>> what he fixed as there are no PKGBUILDs provided yet, a vanilla version
>> just plainly fucked my machine even before it even tried to detect my
>> disks.
>
> I agree. I didn't mean to imply (as someone else pointed out) that I
> disliked the decisions that tpowa makes. I just wanted to point out
> that the kernel is very important.

We're not out against tpowa, we're suggesting improvements. So far mentioned:

1) Documentation of patches. Where are they from? What they do? Why are
they included? (mostly done now)
2) Re-evaluating patches with each release... deally we shouldnt see
patches in 2.6.22 that have been updated from 2.6.12 or even 2.6.21.
3) Proper review of patches. tpowa's done an awesome job, and his
judgement has been great so far -- he isn't infallible as the undervolting
patch shows.

James