Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.debian.kernel > #93497 > unrolled thread

Re: question about expectations of linux kernel stable branch maintenance in Trixie

Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.kernel

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: question about expectations of linux kernel stable branch  maintenance in Trixie Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2026-07-28 21:40 +0200
    Re: question about expectations of linux kernel stable branch  maintenance in Trixie Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2026-07-29 16:00 +0200

#93497 — Re: question about expectations of linux kernel stable branch maintenance in Trixie

Hi Chris,

On Thu, Jul 23, 2026 at 04:11:45PM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm currently using 6.18.15 from trixie-backports, but I noticed that
> upstream is now up to 6.18.39.  Are there any plans to update 6.18 given
> that it's an LTS kernel?
> 
> What's the expectation for someone who would like to pick up kernel CVE
> fixes (hundreds in the last few months) within a reasonable timeframe? Do I
> need to run upstream kernels directly?
> 
> Even the 6.12 kernel in trixie is roughly 2.5 months and 1400 commits behind
> upstream.

Currently we have  7.1.3-1~bpo13+1 in trixie-backports and 6.12.96-1
in trixie itself.

Is your apt sources lists configured for the correct sets of archives?

Regards,
Salvatore

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#93502

Hi Chris,

On Tue, Jul 28, 2026 at 02:29:43PM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> On 7/28/2026 1:30 PM, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > On Thu, Jul 23, 2026 at 04:11:45PM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > 
> > > I'm currently using 6.18.15 from trixie-backports, but I noticed that
> > > upstream is now up to 6.18.39.  Are there any plans to update 6.18 given
> > > that it's an LTS kernel?
> > > 
> > > What's the expectation for someone who would like to pick up kernel CVE
> > > fixes (hundreds in the last few months) within a reasonable timeframe? Do I
> > > need to run upstream kernels directly?
> > > 
> > > Even the 6.12 kernel in trixie is roughly 2.5 months and 1400 commits behind
> > > upstream.
> > 
> > Currently we have  7.1.3-1~bpo13+1 in trixie-backports and 6.12.96-1
> > in trixie itself.
> > 
> > Is your apt sources lists configured for the correct sets of archives?
> I'm expecting to use this for production, so I'm looking for an LTS kernel.
> Version 6.12 doesn't include some hardware support that I need, which means
> I'm interested in the 6.18 stable kernel series.
> 
> 7.1 is interesting from a "latest kernel" perspective, but it isn't an LTS
> kernel.
> 
> As for my comment about 6.12, I must have made a mistake--I thought when I
> looked that it was showing 6.12.86 as the most recent version, but it seems
> there were indeed some later versions released (6.12.88, 6.12.90, 6.12.94,
> 6.12.95, 6.12.96).
> 
> So it appears that the 6.12 stable branch is being tracked reasonably well,
> but the 6.18 stable branch is basically an afterthought.

Now I understand better what you mean. The 6.18.y upstream LTS is not
specifically tracked. trixie-backports takes the kernel in the upper
suite (testing, forky), so once forky get the 7.2.y kernel the
backports variants will be superseeded bya a 7.2.y backports kernel.

If you specifically want 6.18.y then you need to compile the kernel
yourself from upstream. The 6.18.y kernel was available for a time in
trixie-backports when unstable and forky had the 6.18.y and got
superseeded by the 6.19.y one once it migrated to testing.

Regards.
Salvatore

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.kernel

csiph-web