| 1 |
On 20:19 Thu 04 Jul , Mike Pagano wrote: |
| 2 |
> I have 'relaxed' a tad about what I think should be in g-s, but maybe it has |
| 3 |
> gone a bit farther than I wanted it too. |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> I would like to see a "-experimental" use flag and base,extras,geek (whatever) |
| 6 |
> so that g-s goes back to what it's original goal was with nothing non-upstream |
| 7 |
> unless the user does a configuration change themselves. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> This will actually help us solve both issues. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> 1) it will allow us to pull g-s back to it's original goal as a minimal |
| 12 |
> kernel sources with upstream only patches. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Original? Not true. gentoo-sources has, for ages, carried feature |
| 15 |
patches that were considered useful to Gentoo as a whole or to releng in |
| 16 |
particular. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
It's carried whole filesystems like XFS, it's carried EVMS, it's carried |
| 19 |
pretty much the whole ck- patchset (Con Kolivas), grsec, FreeS/WAN and |
| 20 |
OpenS/WAN, the bootsplash stuff, etc. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> 2) we can carry some patches from upstreams trees that possibly aren't yet in |
| 23 |
> -next, or not yet accepted to mainline but do provide some benefit to a smaller |
| 24 |
> group of our users. (Thinking about our thinkpad patches) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Thanks, |
| 28 |
Donnie |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Donnie Berkholz |
| 31 |
Council Member / Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux <http://dberkholz.com> |
| 32 |
Analyst, RedMonk <http://redmonk.com/dberkholz/> |
Archives