> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 09:49:17PM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > It's not ideal for an interface to go from unsupported to mandatory in a
> > single LTS cycle; but I don't believe that the use case of creating a
> > filesystem with one LTS release, then interacting with it using the
> > userspace tools from a previous LTS release, is significant enough to
> > justify holding back features that upstream has recommended as the default.
> >
> > I think it suffices to document this in the release notes.
>
> Thanks. What's your opinion on an SRU to Xenial and/or to Trusty that
> allows e2fsprogs to understand the future filesystem feature? Assuming
> that no default behaviour would be changed for stable release users,
> would this be acceptable to you in principle?
>
> To the rest of the SRU team: any objections to somebody driving this?
> I'm not necessarily committing to this wearing my Canonical Server Team
> hat, but "enyc" in #ubuntu-devel seems quite interested in driving an
> SRU, so it would be useful to get opinions now to avoid any wasted work.
I think it might be useful to snap e2fsprogs, so we have a solution
for all older releases. Not to replace the package, but as a backport
that does not conflict with the system binaries.
Or introduce e2fsprogs-hwe packages to match the hwe kernel which
support the new features.
--
debian developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
ubuntu core developer i speak de, en
--
ubuntu-devel mailing list
ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com
Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
