On Mon, May 01, 2006 at 10:06:59PM +0200, Frans Pop wrote: > On Friday 28 April 2006 22:33, Sven Luther wrote: > > I thought the consensus here was to add the ABI version to the updated > > kernels for those arches lacking it, at least i was asking about this > > for powerpc. > > Well, if an ABI has been added for the security update in the kernel > packages we will of course follow that. But Joey tells me that we cannot > add an ABI for udebs if the kernel image package does not have it.
Why not ? I guess there is some code in d-i that makes assumptions of the kernel-version+abi to the kernel .udeb names. This means that we have to change the abis if the .deb abis changed. Can someone of the kernel team who followed the stable security 2.4 updates comment on this ? > > Furthermore, i want to remember everyone concerned here, that as far as > > sarge powerpc kernels are concerned, only apus and miboot are using > > 2.4.x kernels, and so it makes no real sense to do too much work, as > > apus is hardly a problem with regard to security-fixed d-i images, and > > the official d-i images lack miboot support anyway, and are thus > > useless. > > As we have to rebuild d-i for all arches and thus subarches anyway, it > seems unlogical not to take along any security updates that have been > released for kernel packages. Well, probably, just pointing out that nobody will be using them. I am not doing the work though, so if you have time for it :) Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
