ok, so I put some dates up at http://wiki.centos.org/KaranbirSingh/5.2
Essentially, 25th is the last date that I am still looking at backlog
and mod's etc. After that its basically just all builders go, get the
packages into the -qa target. Once that is done - install media.
this plan gives the -qa guys 6 days to look at stuff. Which should be
enough ?
- KB
[CentOS-devel] 5.2 Dates
| Tweet |
|
Search Discussions
-
Tim Verhoeven at May 23, 2008 at 1:43 pm ⇧
My feeling is that 6 days is going to be to short especially when someOn Fri, May 23, 2008 at 3:23 PM, Karanbir Singh wrote:
ok, so I put some dates up at http://wiki.centos.org/KaranbirSingh/5.2
Essentially, 25th is the last date that I am still looking at backlog and
mod's etc. After that its basically just all builders go, get the packages
into the -qa target. Once that is done - install media.
this plan gives the -qa guys 6 days to look at stuff. Which should be enough
?
of us are going to be at Linuxtag between the 28th and the 31th.
10 days sounds like a more reasonable estimate to me. But it will also
depend on how much issues we find. It can go faster but it can also go
slower.
Anyway, when can we expect the first packages to be build ? I'm
planning on setting up 2 VM's (one for i386, one for x86_64) to give
all build packages a first test, and when all packages are ready let
the rest of the QA'ers loose on them.
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Verhoeven - tim.verhoeven.be@gmail.com - 0479 / 88 11 83
Hoping the problem magically goes away by ignoring it is the
"microsoft approach to programming" and should never be allowed.
(Linus Torvalds) -
Karanbir Singh at May 23, 2008 at 2:36 pm ⇧
I'll start pushing built packages around 1am UTC Sat 24th.Tim Verhoeven wrote:
Anyway, when can we expect the first packages to be build ? I'm
planning on setting up 2 VM's (one for i386, one for x86_64) to give
all build packages a first test, and when all packages are ready let
the rest of the QA'ers loose on them.
- KB
-
John Summerfield at May 30, 2008 at 11:53 am ⇧
Where might the anxious find these? I have an sl5 (another RHEL5 clone)Karanbir Singh wrote:
Tim Verhoeven wrote:Anyway, when can we expect the first packages to be build ? I'mI'll start pushing built packages around 1am UTC Sat 24th.
planning on setting up 2 VM's (one for i386, one for x86_64) to give
all build packages a first test, and when all packages are ready let
the rest of the QA'ers loose on them.
system that's next to useless as there's no adequate support for
graphics. I'd like to try 5.2 before I try it as a boat anchor.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa@coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
You cannot reply off-list:-) -
Ned Slider at May 30, 2008 at 12:31 pm ⇧
You could check the developers blogs at:John Summerfield wrote:
Karanbir Singh wrote:Tim Verhoeven wrote:Where might the anxious find these? I have an sl5 (another RHEL5 clone)Anyway, when can we expect the first packages to be build ? I'mI'll start pushing built packages around 1am UTC Sat 24th.
planning on setting up 2 VM's (one for i386, one for x86_64) to give
all build packages a first test, and when all packages are ready let
the rest of the QA'ers loose on them.
system that's next to useless as there's no adequate support for
graphics. I'd like to try 5.2 before I try it as a boat anchor.
http://planet.centos.org/
Specifically Tim's posting from May 23, 2008.
-
Connie Sieh at May 30, 2008 at 4:15 pm ⇧
There is a a ALPHA of SL 5.2 for i386 available atOn Fri, 30 May 2008, John Summerfield wrote:
Karanbir Singh wrote:Tim Verhoeven wrote:Where might the anxious find these? I have an sl5 (another RHEL5 clone)Anyway, when can we expect the first packages to be build ? I'mI'll start pushing built packages around 1am UTC Sat 24th.
planning on setting up 2 VM's (one for i386, one for x86_64) to give
all build packages a first test, and when all packages are ready let
the rest of the QA'ers loose on them.
system that's next to useless as there's no adequate support for graphics.
I'd like to try 5.2 before I try it as a boat anchor.
ftp://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/i386/
There should be x86_64 version available at
ftp://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/x86_64
soon.
-Connie Sieh
-
Ray Van Dolson at May 30, 2008 at 4:30 pm ⇧
To the parent poster.. if you're just wanting to test for betterOn Fri, May 30, 2008 at 11:15:37AM -0500, Connie Sieh wrote:On Fri, 30 May 2008, John Summerfield wrote:There is a a ALPHA of SL 5.2 for i386 available at
Karanbir Singh wrote:Tim Verhoeven wrote:Where might the anxious find these? I have an sl5 (another RHEL5 clone)Anyway, when can we expect the first packages to be build ? I'mI'll start pushing built packages around 1am UTC Sat 24th.
planning on setting up 2 VM's (one for i386, one for x86_64) to give
all build packages a first test, and when all packages are ready let
the rest of the QA'ers loose on them.
system that's next to useless as there's no adequate support for graphics.
I'd like to try 5.2 before I try it as a boat anchor.
ftp://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/i386/
There should be x86_64 version available at
ftp://ftp.scientificlinux.org/linux/scientific/5rolling/x86_64
soon.
-Connie Sieh
graphics support, why not use an eval copy of RHEL 5.2 vs an Alpha of
SL?
(If you're needing to test *now* vs in a week or two)
Ray
-
Les Mikesell at May 30, 2008 at 6:10 pm ⇧
Can you be more specific as to what you consider "adequate support forJohn Summerfield wrote:
Where might the anxious find these? I have an sl5 (another RHEL5 clone)
system that's next to useless as there's no adequate support for
graphics. I'd like to try 5.2 before I try it as a boat anchor.
graphics"?
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell@gmail.com -
John Summerfield at Jun 1, 2008 at 12:03 pm ⇧
All of these:Les Mikesell wrote:
John Summerfield wrote:Where might the anxious find these? I have an sl5 (another RHEL5Can you be more specific as to what you consider "adequate support for
clone) system that's next to useless as there's no adequate support
for graphics. I'd like to try 5.2 before I try it as a boat anchor.
graphics"?
Framebuffer in xen works.
X works
Switching between virtual consoles and X works.
Those work fine on my Thinkcentre P IV running Sl5, and on my HP DC7700
running F8, but SL5 is a basket case.
On the Thinkcentre, "modprobe intelfb" gets framebuffer,
I don't recall what, if anything, I had to do to f8, I'm running f9 and
that lacks a dom0 kernel (but I have kvm).
Switching works as one would expect on the Thinkcentre (but "fbset
--all" is advantageous).
Switching on SL5 gets various, somewhat random, video corruption in VCs
and in X.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@coco.merseine.nu Z1aaaaaaa@coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
You cannot reply off-list:-)
Related Discussions
Discussion Navigation
| view | thread | post |
Discussion Overview
| group | centos-devel |
| categories | centos |
| posted | May 23, '08 at 1:23p |
| active | Jun 1, '08 at 12:03p |
| posts | 9 |
| users | 7 |
| website | centos.org |
| irc | #centos |
