Hi Joey, On Thu, Dec 16, 2004 at 06:33:31PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > Looking at how these proposed fixes would affect d-i and existing rc2 > images: > > a. If the SONAME is left unchanged and the new ABI remains, and things > are updated to use the new ABI: > - Installs from a rc2 netinst CD will keep working, but you'll get a > kernel with the old ABI. Installs of "third-party" (ie, alsa) > kernel modules that use the new ABI will then fail. Until you > upgrade your kernel.. > - Installs from a rc2 businesscard CD will be ok. > - The rc2 netboot and floppy images will stop working once udebs > built with the new ABI reach sarge. > - We won't need to make any other changes to d-i aside from putting > those udebs in sarge and rebuilding the d-i images. > - However we won't be able to easily/widely test netboot or floppy > installs using the new ABI kernels until the udebs reach sarge. > The daily builds would need to be hacked to pull udebs from sid to > do any significant testing. > b. If the SONAME is increased and the ABI changes reverted for -1:
It is my understading that releasing -2 packages would result in the -1 packages being removed from the debian archive as regardless of weather the binary packages are -1, -2, or -X, the source package is infact kernel-image-2.4.27-<arch>. Are you proposing that we should add a new source package, kernel-image-2.4.27-<arch>-2 which produces SONAME=2 binary packages and leave kernel-image-2.4.27-<arch> providing the SONAME=1 packages. Or are you suggesting that the -1 binary packages will just hang around in the archive for a while? > - All rc2 images will keep working until/unless the udebs from the -1 > kernels are removed from sarge, when the netboot and floppy images will > break. > - We'll need to build new udebs for the -2 kernels, while keeping > the udebs from the -1 kernels. This will either mean some ugly > linux-kernel-di packages that build both from one package, or the > even more ugly splitting off of a linux-kernel-di-i386-2 for the > -2 kernels. Nasty nasty nasty. > - Changes will be needed in debian-cd to drop the -1 stuff from > CDs to avoid space issues. > - At the moment I think that d-i/anna will do the right thing WRT > using the -2 udebs if the -2 kernel is running. However we've > never been in this situation before, so something could fail. > - Changes will be needed in rootskel to install the -2 kernel > images. Some arches may also need base-installer changes. > - Not sure how this affects "third party" modules in debian, do they > have to build modules for both kernel SONAMEs? Do they drop -1 > debs? If so rc2 gets subtly broken. > - Simply increasing the number of udebs in sarge with -2 kernel > udebs will change d-i's memory usage, which could break 20 mb > installs. I think we have a big gap before we need to worry about > 32 mb installs. Still we'd need to retest everything for lowmem > again, or remove the -1 kernel udebs before the next d-i release. > > I keep seeming to come up with new issues with approach b. Leaning toward > a.. A sounds fine from my point of view, as it involves the least effort. Although as I discovered this morning, there seems to be a second ABI change relating to the same patch, so we should get that out ASAP. http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=284356#msg68 -- Horms
