On 06/17/2014 03:00 PM, Johnny Hughes wrote: > On 06/17/2014 02:51 PM, Guillaume Derval wrote: >> Le 17 juin 2014 à 19:57, Akemi Yagi <amyagi at gmail.com> a écrit : >>> With my initial concern gone, I now have more practical question. >>> >>> The modifications are quite extensive as noted in the beginning. I >>> count 15 patches in include/ and 29 in /net . For each kernel update, >>> the patch set must be updated/tested. Also there may be updates to the >>> patches themselves within a given kernel release. How can this be best >>> handled? Could dealing with the patches cause a delay in the cplus >>> kernel release? >>> >>> Having a separate kernel addressing the mptcp stuff might work around >>> that potential issue. >>> >>> Akemi >> I personally think that creating a separate kernel (kernel-cplus-mptcp? :-) ) is the best thing to do. >> > I think a separate kernel might be best too. > > It can be kernel-mptcp and live in centos-plus if we choose to do > kernel-plus, kernel-<some_name>, etc. or we can do it another way, but > regardless in a separate kernel is likely best. That also means that someone (or someones) need to volunteer to maintain it as well. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20140617/49b4f29e/attachment-0007.sig>