| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
dmpogo
Advocate
Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 3439
Location: Canada
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:13 am Post subject: Kernel 4.9 forever ? |
 |
|
| So, has anybody info, what are the plans with the next Gentoo stable kernel ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 9302
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dmpogo
Advocate
Joined: 02 Sep 2004
Posts: 3439
Location: Canada
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 3:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| asturm wrote: | | https://bugs.gentoo.org/649198 |
I just felt it is the right time to ask  , thanks |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HungGarTiger
Apprentice
Joined: 04 Feb 2014
Posts: 180
Location: /nz/auckland
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 6:59 am Post subject: Re: 4.9 forever ? |
|
|
| dmpogo wrote: | | So, has anybody info, what are the plans with the next Gentoo stable kernel ? |
I mean, I'm happy to stay here forever  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
grellyd
n00b
Joined: 11 Oct 2016
Posts: 21
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Forever? Probably not. But at least until Jan 2019 https://www.kernel.org/releases.html
Anyone know why 4.4 has a longer projected EOL than 4.9/4.14? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tholin
Apprentice
Joined: 04 Oct 2008
Posts: 205
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hu
Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 22724
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
I find that rationale entertaining for several reasons.- Vendors exhausting the two years of support during development is at least partly their own fault for clinging to a development methodology where they grab a kernel at the start of the project and pin to it indefinitely. If their development and testing procedures could handle receiving kernel updates, they would not need to pin during development. At worst, they might need to pin during the final freeze and pin users post-release.
- Similarly, if they had better testing procedures, rolling to new major kernel versions would not be such an issue. Upstream has an aggressive no-reported-regressions policy.
- Finally, and this is the huge point, for many users, it does not matter how long anyone supports their kernel, because they only get kernel updates their cellphone provider and the providers have a long history of issuing updates only in the most dire of circumstances. I'm sure someone will be pulling updates from the extended LTS maintains, but I suspect that a substantial portion of the Android devices running 4.4.x kernels will never actually be updated to these bonus LTS releases because the cellphone provider cannot be bothered to roll it out.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Zucca
Moderator
Joined: 14 Jun 2007
Posts: 3741
Location: Rasi, Finland
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Cell/smartphone software (the software not visible to the user, the one close to the metal) state at the moment is just horrible. App makers usually do update their "apps" as long as underlying system can support them. The system that's under there just doesn't get updates long enough. There are some exceptions...
_________________
..: Zucca :..
| My gentoo installs: | init=/sbin/openrc-init
-systemd -logind -elogind seatd |
| Quote: | | I am NaN! I am a man! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Marcih
Apprentice
Joined: 19 Feb 2018
Posts: 213
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| asturm wrote: | | https://bugs.gentoo.org/649198 |
Hey! Last time I asked, I was told "move to ~arch ecks dee"! 
Anyways, I'm glad there are new(er) kernel sources in the process of being stabilised. I can't stay on stable on most of my machines simply because of bugs/missing drivers that were fixed/added in later versions (that are currently in testing branch).
_________________
| Bones McCracker wrote: | | It wouldn't be so bad, if it didn't suck. |
| NeddySeagoon wrote: | | The problem with leaving is that you can only do it once and it reduces your influence. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 9302
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 8:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Well, me posting a stabilisation bug does not change the fact that it is practically meaningless in terms of 'will it work fine for me and my hardware'. The question was different. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
depontius
Advocate
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 3522
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 16, 2018 10:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I run mostly stable on all of my systems, with a sprinkling of ~amd64, like firefox-58 and its dependencies.
But on all but two of my systems I run ~amd64 kernels.
_________________
.sigs waste space and bandwidth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
szczerb
Veteran
Joined: 24 Feb 2007
Posts: 1709
Location: Poland => Lodz
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I've been on 4.14.11-gentoo-r2 for over 3 months now. I usually stick to stable arch kernels, but needed this for some hardware support improvement I think...don't really remember what anymore. Anyway, rock stable on my work laptop - which means exactly nothing in the larger scheme of things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 9302
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If you are on 4.14.11-r2 right now then there is absolutely no reason not to upgrade to 4.14.28. According to upstream you actually *must upgrade*. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Spargeltarzan
Guru
Joined: 23 Jul 2017
Posts: 325
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 5:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
asturm,
Wouldn't that also mean that users on stable 4.9.79-r1 "must" also upgrade to 4.9.88?
I upgrade on 4.14.* as updates appear regularly and it works without any issues for me.
_________________
___________________
Regards
Spargeltarzan
Notebook: Lenovo YOGA 900-13ISK: Gentoo stable amd64, GNOME systemd, KVM/QEMU
Desktop-PC: Intel Core i7-4770K, 8GB Ram, AMD Radeon R9 280X, ZFS Storage, GNOME openrc, Dantrell, Xen |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
asturm
Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007
Posts: 9302
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spargeltarzan wrote: | | Wouldn't that also mean that users on stable 4.9.79-r1 "must" also upgrade to 4.9.88? |
Technically yes. It would be pointless for the Gentoo kernel team to stabilise each and every minor release at the frequency that upstream is hammering them out, and so the releases seem to be stabilised in an arbitrary cycle unless something important comes up (like a security issue). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tholin
Apprentice
Joined: 04 Oct 2008
Posts: 205
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 20, 2018 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Spargeltarzan wrote: | | Wouldn't that also mean that users on stable 4.9.79-r1 "must" also upgrade to 4.9.88? |
Yes.
The upstream kernel take a lax approach to handling security. They never issue any security advisories or communicate security problems to users. The only hint you get that the kernel patches a serious vulnerability is that the release announcement says all users must upgrade instead of should upgrade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hu
Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007
Posts: 22724
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| tholin wrote: | | The upstream kernel take a lax approach to handling security. They never issue any security advisories or communicate security problems to users. The only hint you get that the kernel patches a serious vulnerability is that the release announcement says all users must upgrade instead of should upgrade. |
As I understand it, that's not even an accurate filter. GregKH went to using must as boilerplate quite a while ago, without regard to whether there are specific security issues fixed in any given release. (Unless you believe that every single point release contains major undisclosed security fixes, in which case you could be right and he would still be using must ...) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tholin
Apprentice
Joined: 04 Oct 2008
Posts: 205
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 21, 2018 10:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
@Hu
Looks like you are right. Even point releases without any published CVE is marked as must upgrade now. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo Chat
