lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Dec]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateThu, 17 Dec 1998 12:29:13 +0100 (CET)
From"Pascal A. Dupuis" <>
SubjectDefining a standard mechanism for patches
While on the subject of kernel patches, someone mentionned ac, arca, vger
sources of patches. He forgot about linux-mama, bigphysarea, devfs, QNX
scheduler, crypto and surely a lot of others ... ;-)

Would it be convenient to define a standard (i.e. official,
supported) mechanism to use those patches, in order to know "this is kernel
2.X.Y, with applied patches so and so" ? It would look like the approach
used in the linux-mama system:
-each patch lives under /usr/src/linux/patches
-each patch add a one-liner .pinfo file under /usr/src/linux/init/patches,
describing the main purpose and the author/maintainer. All those files are
gathered together at compile time, in order to print a list of applied
patches at boot-up
-we would have a /proc/patches entry, containing this list of patches.
This way, it would be possible to obtain the information from a running
kernel.
-each patch should clearly have a status :
-reported to work/working OK / untested / ...
-new feature / bug fix / security fix
-will be included later / experimental / Linus say "nay!"
- ...
This is a new feature (code freeze, I know), but it would help a lot to
know the exact status of a kernel.

Pascal A. Dupuis

--
linux : un noyau
windows : des pépins


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:46    [from the cache]
©2003-2010