First kernel upload for gutsy...priceless

Matt Zimmerman mdz at ubuntu.com
Sat May 5 09:12:24 UTC 2007


On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 02:02:42PM -0400, Chuck Short wrote:
> On 5/4/07, Matt Zimmerman <mdz at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> > This is disconcerting to me.  Once these patches are incorporated into a
> > stable release, Canonical is committed to supporting them even if the teams
> > behind them wane and disappear.  If a security patch conflicts with one of
> > them, this could seriously delay the testing and release of critical
> > updates.
> >
> > Wouldn't it be wiser to keep these separate?  If these secondary flavours
> > were provided by another source package in universe, this would avoid
> > blocking core development.
> 
> In the Xen case, since the xen kernel is going to be based off of
> 2.6.22. it would be difficult to keep up with the the ubuntu kernel
> source with a separate source package in universe. Since I would have
> to generate a new source each time figure out what has changed and
> merge the xen bits into the new kernel.  With the new build system in
> place I just have to generate a patch that uses all of the shiny bits
> that we have.

It would require that you merge and upload a new source package if and when
you wanted to merge in the changes from the main Ubuntu tree, nothing more.
Create a git tree with the Ubuntu and Xen changes in it, pull and resolve
conflicts as necessary.  This can be as close or as far from the current
Ubuntu tree as necessary to keep up with Xen.

This seems like a similar amount of work to having a patch dynamically
applied during the build, but ensures that the work can be done by a third
party, at their convenience, rather than having to be resolved by the kernel
team or security team when releasing a new version of the kernel.

> If something does break Ben can tell me that it broke and it has been
> disabled. In this case I would get the latest tree from git, build it,
> see where it broken update the xen patch and resubmit the patch to be
> enabled.

This sounds like a reasonable idea when thinking in terms of active
development, but this is software which is going to be released to millions
of users and maintained for years to come.  We need to take care to account
for that.

-- 
 - mdz




More information about the kernel-team mailing list