[RFC] Process for maintaining stable updates for drm for Lucid

Ben Hutchings ben at decadent.org.uk
Mon Aug 30 17:20:58 UTC 2010

On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 12:08:08PM -0500, manoj.iyer at canonical.com wrote:
> One thing that I would like to point out is that, there are some  
> infrastructural changes that have gone into drm since 2.6.33. Many/Most 
> of the recent patches reference that new infrastructure. OEMs prefers to  
> base on lucid, and they have products that are scheduled to be released  
> based on newer intel chipsets. The patches that go into upstream for 
> these chipsets will need to be backported from .35 to lucid, and also any 
> reference to new infrastructure changed to use the old one. I am 
> concerned this might lead to other problems. My suggestion if a patch has 
> a dependency, we should try to pull in the dependency as well instead of  
> backporting to .32.

Debian generally tries to avoid ABI breakage in stable updates, though
adding new exported symbols is fine.  So long as you don't include
patches that remove symbols, we can probably fudge the rest for ABI


Ben Hutchings
We get into the habit of living before acquiring the habit of thinking.
                                                              - Albert Camus
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 827 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/kernel-team/attachments/20100830/15a1dab0/attachment.sig>

More information about the kernel-team mailing list