[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] devleopment sources are no longer 'development' -
From:       Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2 () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2004-08-27 21:59:22
Message-ID: 1093644704.5253.51.camel () cgianelloni ! nuvox ! net
[Download RAW message or body]


On Fri, 2004-08-27 at 17:37, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > ...and how would you run a machine with both if one were masked by the
> > profile?  A user should not be required to change profiles to change
> > kernels.
> 
> Well, the "higher" or 2.6 profile would allow both. If the change is "no 
> problem" enough then a new profile would not be necessary, but at least for 
> x86 the 2.6 kernel is still a bit experimental. Normal users should not be 
> automatically updated.

That makes sense as far as the profiles are concerned.

I do disagree on the "normal users should not be automatically upgraded"
for two reasons.  One is that Linus, et al. consider the kernel to be
the "stable" kernel.  The second is that we don't force anyone to
upgrade their kernel.  It is still a manual process.

That being said, I'm more than willing to go with a specific profile,
and was actually planning on implementing one for 2004.3 as a separate
stacked profile.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Operations/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]