Merge into stable

Mike (mwester) mwester at
Sat Jul 19 00:14:48 CEST 2008

Werner Almesberger wrote:
> Holger Freyther wrote:
>> I think we should merge the 2.6.24.x series into our stable branch.
> Or maybe just move to 2.6.26 ? 2.6.24 is getting old, and there doesn't
> seem to be any overwhelming need for having perfectly stable kernels
> every day at the moment. (I.e., no factory image with urgent fixes is
> being branched right now. ASU can probably survive a few days without
> new kernel changes.)

The last time we did this, the GTA02 fared well.  The GTA01, however,
languished for months, and then took another couple of months to catch
up.  It's a huge effort for a very few people in the community to just
be able to keep up with what Andy, Zecke, and you are changing in the

Without some committed assistance to ensure that the GTA01 can catch up,
this proposed change will almost certainly leave that device behind --
and while one can argue that there's no reason it can't remain running
the older kernel, we all know that's not the whole story.

> Andy mentioned a few blockers he's been watching for a time. How hard
> would it be to fix these ?
> The longer we stay at an old kernel, the harder it will be to catch up.
> I made the mistake of stopping to upgrade once in a project (linux-atm,
> after some major changes to the networking infrastructure), and getting
> back on track took about a year and required a lot of help from outside
> the project.

No denying this, but to change in mid-stream also has unforeseen costs;
and while I suspect that sufficient effort applied by the full-time
experts at Openmoko will overcome any hurdles, I cannot say the same for
the community projects that may be impacted.

> - Werner

Mike (mwester)

More information about the openmoko-kernel mailing list