Message ID | 87fvvnafgr.fsf@canonical.com |
---|---|
State | New |
Headers | show |
On 07/09/2013 10:03 AM, Luis Henriques wrote: > BugLink: http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1199401 > > This set of patches will bring upstream commit f8b8404 "Modify UEFI > anti-bricking code" into the Quantal kernel. All the required > dependencies have also been pulled in, along with a fix to a buffer > memory allocation. > > Most of the backports have been based on Ben Hutchings' backports to > upstream 3.2 kernel. > > A good amount of testing has already done by Colin on 5 different UEFI > systems, but some more testing/review is probably required. > I'm curious why you aren't running this through 3.5.y stable ?
Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com> writes: > On 07/09/2013 10:03 AM, Luis Henriques wrote: >> BugLink: http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1199401 >> >> This set of patches will bring upstream commit f8b8404 "Modify UEFI >> anti-bricking code" into the Quantal kernel. All the required >> dependencies have also been pulled in, along with a fix to a buffer >> memory allocation. >> >> Most of the backports have been based on Ben Hutchings' backports to >> upstream 3.2 kernel. >> >> A good amount of testing has already done by Colin on 5 different UEFI >> systems, but some more testing/review is probably required. >> > > I'm curious why you aren't running this through 3.5.y stable ? The plan is to include them in 3.5.y stable as well. We just wanted to make sure these patches wouldn't hit Quantal only on the SRU cycle immediately before the next point release. Cheers,
On 07/10/2013 03:22 AM, Luis Henriques wrote: > Tim Gardner <tim.gardner@canonical.com> writes: > >> On 07/09/2013 10:03 AM, Luis Henriques wrote: >>> BugLink: http://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1199401 >>> >>> This set of patches will bring upstream commit f8b8404 "Modify UEFI >>> anti-bricking code" into the Quantal kernel. All the required >>> dependencies have also been pulled in, along with a fix to a buffer >>> memory allocation. >>> >>> Most of the backports have been based on Ben Hutchings' backports to >>> upstream 3.2 kernel. >>> >>> A good amount of testing has already done by Colin on 5 different UEFI >>> systems, but some more testing/review is probably required. >>> >> >> I'm curious why you aren't running this through 3.5.y stable ? > > The plan is to include them in 3.5.y stable as well. We just wanted > to make sure these patches wouldn't hit Quantal only on the SRU cycle > immediately before the next point release. > > Cheers, > If we accept these patches into Quantal now, then we lose out on the wider community review which, given the size and complexity of the patch set, I would very much prefer. The only time I think it is appropriate to micro-manage patches with respect to the SRU cycle is when a point release is dependent upon them. This is not such a case. rtg