Kernel Bug Migration

Krzysztof Lichota krzysiek at lichota.net
Tue Jun 17 14:18:32 UTC 2008


2008/6/17 Ben Collins <ben.collins at canonical.com>:
>> Seems like the opposite of the whole LTS idea. Fix-by-upgrade is not a
>> solution. Newer release could introduce other bugs and then what?
>> Upgrade to even newer version? Not to mention that LTS releases are
>> rare, so there might be no newer LTS version to upgrade to.
>>
>> IMO bugs should be fixed in LTS kernels and/or newer kernels should be
>> backported to LTS releases.
>
> For LTS releases, we only guarantee that we wont regress the kernel, and
> that we will keep it up-to-date with security fixes. Fixing known bugs
> is on a best-effort basis and is not guaranteed. So this isn't anything
> new.

So it comes down to: there is no use in reporting bugs against LTS as
they will be fixed in 2 years?

Shouldn't it be "we will try hard to iron out all bugs for LTS and
deliver it in non-disruptible, voluntary manner (through -backports or
-updates)"?

-- 

	Krzysztof Lichota




More information about the kernel-team mailing list