On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 20:45:58 -0400 (EDT), Ben Hutchings wrote: > On Sat, 2010-06-26 at 20:35 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote: >> >> Sounds reasonable to me. This is for Squeeze+1, right? > > No, we need something like this for squeeze.
On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 17:51:11 +0200, Maximilian Attems wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jun 2010 10:55:35 -0400 (EDT), Stephen Powell wrote: >> >> As for "update-initramfs -u", it *will* invoke lilo if lilo is installed >> and "do_bootloader = yes" is specified in /etc/kernel-img.conf, which I >> highly recommend. > > this fall back will be gone as soon as squeeze is out. > so you'd really need to gear up. (The above quotes are from the bug log for Debian bug number 505609.) This led me to believe that, for lilo and zipl anyway, specifying do_bootloader = yes in /etc/kernel-img.conf would be sufficient to get the boot loader run when "update-initramfs -u" is executed at least through and including the Squeeze release. But in Squeeze+1 this "fallback", as Max put it, will no longer work and therefore a new architecture will be needed. Did I misunderstand something? -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1719776969.315340.1277606604200.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
