Jaunty stable update

[Stefan Bader]

Tim Gardner wrote:
> Stefan Bader wrote:
>> Tim Gardner wrote:
>>> Stefan - I applied and pushed 2.6.28.10 to Jaunty in pursuit of LP
>>> #330824. See
>>> https://bugs.edge.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/330824/comments/139
>>> for details.
>>>
>>> rtg
>> Hm, you know Jaunty is in SRU mode, do you? ;-) Where is the the
>> - launchpad bug for it
> 
> Oops, I've been working on non-SRU kernels and just plain forgot: LP
> #371651.

Thanks. :) Thought as much, so count it just as a hopefully not to unfriendly 
reminder.

>> - kernel-team mail and your two acks? I scanned over all and there
>>   are some scsi updates that are a bit harder to judge. One cryptofs patch
>>   I also have to look at close. Maybe someone else can look over the set.
>>   ACK from my side with a note we probably should get some fs/storage
>> sanity
>>   testing done with those patches applied.
>> - As a nicety to my laziness it would be nice to have the Bug (or BugLink)
>>   lines in the patches, but ok, there is cut&paste. :)
> 
> You've actually amended the commit messages for each stable update to
> include the LP bug number?

Sort of, I got a script for that, though.

>> - Were you able to take all patches? IMO, there should be at least one that
>>   was already applied through a bug report...
>>
> 
> All of the patches applied cleanly after 'Revert "UBUNTU: SAUCE: md:
> wait for possible pending deletes after stopping an array"'
> 

Ok, yes, that was the one I seemed to remember. Just wanted to make sure I did 
not miss something.

>> Stefan
> 
> If you're not happy with this, then feel free to reset HEAD back to
> Ubuntu-2.6.28-12.43 and start over. The patch that I thought would fix
> the ext4 issue didn't, so I've gotta keep digging.

Well, on the one hand its not to the process. On the other hand, its pushed for 
some time and I don't want to mangle around with that without a grave reason. 
So, I would say you got properly "scolded" and we leave the repo as it is. One 
more reviewer would not hurt though (I think apw already looked a little at 
them, so he can respond tomorrow). The on top bugfix for ext4 looks sensible, 
though it would be good to have a real testcase/tester for it. But I think we 
can well argue that locking one thing and unlocking something else really is wrong.

Stefan

-- 

When all other means of communication fail, try words!