On Jul 26, 2011, at 3:11 PM, Kyle McMartin wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2011 at 02:21:52PM -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> 3.x needs a bunch of userspace updated, which could explain things like the raid
> failure you're seeing. That's why we're doing a 2.6.40 for updates.
> It's 3.0 in all but name.
>
Very little should be broken by the x.y.z/3.0.0, most of the broken
userspace was due to x.y version numbers, and strict test on the result
of scanf.
Been running 3.0 rc kernels for some time on an f15 box without any
problems, though its mainly for testing local kernel changes, so I
wouldn't have seen much in the way of userspace breakage. But the
box does have software (md) raid, and it comes up fine. I just assume
push 3.0 as 3.0, starting with testing. The userspace all has to work
eventually anyway, so why not fix it in f15.
--
Jarod Wilson
jarod(a)wilsonet.com