| |||||||||||||
Compression formats for kernel.orgCompression formats for kernel.orgPosted Feb 19, 2010 0:01 UTC (Fri) by gdt (subscriber, #6284)In reply to: Compression formats for kernel.org by clugstj Parent article: Compression formats for kernel.org
But you are asking users to do exactly that when reporting errors. The LKML doesn't like reports against distribution kernels, it prefers reports again a recent kernel.org kernel. So if you want decent error reports then you've got to make it easy for users — even beginners who have no interest in Linux beyond this one bug that is making their life hell — to download, compile, install and run the kernel.org kernel on their otherwise stock operating system. If you don't want decent error reports and real user testing of recent kernels, then by all means use tools that aren't packaged with recent distributions. In summary: move tar.bz2 to whatever but keep tar.gz.
(Log in to post comments)
Compression formats for kernel.org Posted Feb 19, 2010 0:19 UTC (Fri) by jspaleta (subscriber, #50639) [Link]
Uhm... are upstream kernel developers really asking for beginners to do all that on their own? I'm not sure they are. I think there is an implied expectation that distributors are suppose to act in enlightened self-interest to help their less-technical userbase produce useful bug reports.
I don't really expect the vast majority of linux beginners using Google Android or Palm WebOS users to have the technical competence or desire to compile stock kernels on their own without the intervention of Google or Palm employees who originally built and tested the patched kernel binaries being used by their users.
-jef
Compression formats for kernel.org Posted Feb 19, 2010 10:51 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
Quite so.
I mean, sure, if you're using some out-of-tree thingy you got yourself, then obviously you're expected to be able to patch/compile/build your own kernel... but if it came from the distro, then *they* are the ones who should be interacting with upstream to pass on bug reports (although things might be interesting if there are bugs that only the end user can reproduce: in that situation I'd expect a three-way, with upstream providing diagnostic patches, the distro building them for the poor damn user or providing a script to do so, and the user running them and reporting the results. Maybe this is too much wild-eyed dreaming, but the alternative is that bugs in the manifold out-of-tree patches that some distros include will never be fixed unless upstream happens to have just the right hardware to reproduce them.)
|
|||||||||||||