Mail archive

Re: [alpine-devel] 3.4 kernel for v2.4 stable?

From: Natanael Copa <>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 08:53:58 +0200

On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 23:07:56 +0100
Kevin Chadwick <> wrote:

> > * We are not the first switching from v3.3 to v3.4. Fedora 17
> > already did.
> >
> I see no problem with 3.4 but I wouldn't track fedora for good
> practice, they shipped grub2 beta which damages multi-boot setups and
> which was explained in an entire paragraph warning of this in the
> relatively short manual.

True, but at least would not be the first jumping to 3.4 for a stable
> > Cons:
> > * Risk for unexpected breakages.
> > * We still have to backport grsecurity patches since they are not
> > supported from anymore.
> >
> I guess it would be counter productive now but wouldn't it be easier
> for you to track 3.2 and the stable grsecurity patch

That scares me even more. I know for sure we will need MTU and
routing related patches. I have the feeling that 3.2 is not one of the
better kernels.

And if people are using the new stuff (eg openvswitch, vlan netpoll
etc) those will for sure stop working.

> or is the backporting little work?

Kernels requires some work anyway. Backporting patches does not
normally add much additional work. I would prefer doing that than
maintaining the 3.2 kernel.

There are also a chance that Spender and Pipacs will support 3.4
kernel now that it is announced as longterm.


Received on Thu Aug 23 2012 - 08:53:58 UTC