Hello, On 25/05/2025 17:00, Cyril Brulebois wrote:
Hi,To be honest, I almost asked what the plans were for 6.12.29-1 regarding this issue, and whether Severity: important was appropriate. But I got busy with other things and let this fly… Salvatore Bonaccorso <car...@debian.org> (2025-05-25):I see your point and having though the ITS mitigations in my opinion is more important. But stepping a bit back I fully understand as well your point of view. Cyril and Debian boot people, would you actually want to not get 6.12.29-1 into trixie?Regarding the installer itself, I'm fine with either having .29 then .30 or just waiting for .30. I definitely can see how live people might want to avoid a known broken kernel's reaching testing though.FWIW, the next upload *will* include a fix for the loop issue. I have already imported 6.12.30 for the packaging and marked the loop fix as to be backported to 6.12.
If 6.12.30 is nearly ready to be uploaded, I would propose to skip 6.12.29 and have 6.12.30 in (perhaps even faster than with a 10 day delay)
If we were to have 6.12.29, the live images based on trixie will be untestable and we would fly blind regarding trixie until 6.12.30 lands there. We are currently unable to test the live images based on sid, which is already a bit uncomfortable to me, I have even considered writing a hack to use the trixie kernel instead.
So 6.12.27 in trixie and 6.12.30 in sid seems the better option to me. With kind regards, Roland Clobus
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
