Changing kernel API / Breaking VirtualBox - update criteria violation?
mjg59 at srcf.ucam.org
Tue Nov 22 23:20:36 UTC 2011
On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 01:44:26PM -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 08:53:33PM +0000, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Really. Use common sense. You appear to be the only person who's
> > strongly confused on this issue.
A question is asked. The answer is "yes".
It's asked whether kernel updates may violate the update policy by
virtue of supported hardware having stopped working. And the answer to
that one is pretty obviously yes - supported behaviour that previously
worked no longer works. This one is supported by the assumption that
overall the bug and security fixes in the new kernel are an overall
improvement to the project, but it would certainly be worth having a
discussion about what we can do to attempt to avoid hardware-specific
regressions like this. It's unrelated to what we've been talking about.
And that's simply based on the assumption that the user experience
includes expecting to be able to use third party modules, which it
doesn't. We could certainly clarify that.
Matthew Garrett | mjg at srcf.ucam.org
More information about the devel