On Wed, Mar 23, 2005 at 11:33:05AM +0100, Martin Schulze wrote: > Horms wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am finally nearing the bottom of my todo list for the > > up and coming release of kernel-source-2.4.27 2.4.27-9. > > And to date, the only ABI change I have is for CAN-2005-0449, > > as per my mail yesterday. > > > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2005/03/msg00689.html > > > > To the best of my knowledge 2.6.8 is in the same position - > > I worked with Andres Salomon on the fix that went in there, > > and the fix that was pulled out, and they are the > > same fixes as for 2.4.27. > > > > I am quite comfortable with doing a post-sarge security update > > for this if the d-i team feels this is the best approach. > > Though it is a remote exploit, and that needs to be > > taken into due consideration. > > We need to discuss how to handle security updates that impose ABI > changes anyway. The current situation in woody is not acceptable > for sarge. > > That is, new package names, and due to the abi change the updates > can't make it into woody. > > We'd need at least a list of module packages that we need to > recompile when a kernel update changes the ABI and all the > modules become void. > > This also means that we need to be able to rebuild modules from > their corresponding source package.
Notice that enabling auto-NEW for such abi-changes will speed up this process considerably, but i was told a whinner for even suggesting such, and bashed upon unendlessly. Alos, please find someone else for building the powerpc 2.6.8 and 2.4.27 security updates as i will most certainly not do that anymore. Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
