On Wed, 22 Aug 2012 23:07:56 +0100
Kevin Chadwick <ma1l1ists_at_yahoo.co.uk> 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 grsecurity.net 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
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