Marc Haber <mh+debian-de...@zugschlus.de> writes:
> On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 19:48:24 +0000, Ben Hutchings
> <b...@decadent.org.uk> wrote:
>>On Fri, Nov 18, 2011 at 05:59:59PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
>>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 20:43:32 +0000, "Adam D. Barratt"
>>> <a...@adam-barratt.org.uk> wrote:
>>> >but
>>> >the kernel team have been very good in the past about fixing such things
>>> >once they're aware of them.
>>>
>>> Why does the kernel team get an execption that is unanonimously denied
>>> to other, much less important parts of the distribution?
>>
>>You can easily upgrade a userland package from backports after
>>installation. You can't do that with the kernel if the installer
>>doesn't support your disk or network controller. (It is possible
>>to use a newer installer to install stable, but that's much more
>>prone to break or to differ from the installation manual.)
>
> The solution would be to offer additional install media with
> additional support. The mere chance of introducing a regression is a
> risk which I think should not be taken by Debian.
>
> GrüÃe
> Marc
Or just keeping the old kernel and modules so the old images remain
functional. I think that would be the best solution.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87hb202ini.fsf@frosties.localnet
