On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 09:16:34AM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 01:32:56PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 09:20:44PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 08, 2005 at 08:36:41PM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > > > > tags 331391 moreinfo > > > > thanks > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 03, 2005 at 05:34:36PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > > > > Hi ftpmasters, > > > > > > > > Hi Horms, > > > > > > > > > After discussion with the d-i team, the 2.6.8 kernel > > > > > can now be removed from the archive. Accordinly, please remove > > > > > the following packages: > > > > > > > > > > kernel-image-2.6.8-alpha > > > > > kernel-image-2.6.8-amd64 > > > > > kernel-image-2.6.8-hppa > > > > > kernel-image-2.6.8-i386 > > > > > kernel-image-2.6.8-ia64 > > > > > kernel-image-2.6.8-m68k > > > > > kernel-image-2.6.8-s390 > > > > > kernel-image-2.6.8-sparc > > > > > kernel-patch-2.6.8-hppa > > > > > kernel-patch-2.6.8-m68k > > > > > kernel-patch-powerpc-2.6.8 > > > > > kernel-source-2.6.8 > > > > > kernel-kbuild-2.6-3 > > > > > > > > > > In addition, the following packages should be removed, > > > > > but they should have been hijacked by linux-2.6, I am not > > > > > sure why this hasn't happened. > > > > > > > > > > kernel-latest-2.6-alpha > > > > > kernel-latest-2.6-amd64 > > > > > kernel-latest-2.6-hppa > > > > > kernel-latest-2.6-i386 > > > > > kernel-latest-2.6-s390 > > > > > kernel-latest-2.6-sparc > > > > > > > > Removing the first list will break the second list, in particular, those > > > > kernel-headers-2.6-subarch packages. So the magical short names for > > > > 'latest > > > > kernel headers' will cease to work in unstable then. > > > > > > Nope, the latest are now provided by the linux-2.6 package as a legacy > > > compatibility thingy and depend on the linux-image 2.6.12 kernels. I think > > > from now on, and with the exception of the mips kernels, all 2.6 kernel > > > related source packages which are not linux-2.6 should go. > > > > Sven, I don't think this is the case. Examining > > kernel-headers-2.6-686-smp in sid I find that it is a package > > produced by the kernel-latest-2.6-i386 source package. I do not > > see it provided as a virtual or real package by linux-2.6. > > If I understand Jeroen correctly, this needs to be resolved. > > > > In a nutshell it seems that kernel-image-2.6-<flavour> is > > handled by linux-2.6 but kernel-headers-2.6-<flavour> > > > > This problem does not seem to exist on powerpc because the header > > packages, (called kernel-build-*) were never released as generic > > 2.6-<flavour> dummy packages. However, adding > > kernel-headers-2.6-<flavour> as part of the transition would do no harm. > > Indeed -- I asked about this, because I do not know enough about the usage of > kernel-headers-2.6-<flavour> packages, whether it would make sense to seize to > provide those, and break upgrade path for them. It might be the case that that > would make more sense than to continue their existance -- but it is not > something I can judge, the kernel team can do so much better. > > (...) > > it seems we need to add a little more package magic first. > > So that is up to you -- if the kernel team decides that no upgrade path is > needed on the other hand, that's fine with me too. I merely want it to be > well-thoughtover decision, and not an implicit consequence :).
Well, the upgrade consequences are much less for kernel-headers than for kernel-image, but still worth worrying about IMHO. In an nutshell, whatever was done for kernel-image-2.6-<flavour> should be done for kernel-headers-2.6-<flavour> I'll look into making this happen unless someone beats me too it. (Please feel free to if you are interested :) -- Horms -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
