Re: Bug#328130: RM: please remove any remnant of 2.6.10 and 2.6.11 kernels from etch/sid

[Horms <horms@debian.org>]

On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 04:50:26AM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 11:19:37AM +0900, Horms wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 01:35:47AM +0200, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote:
> > > (...)
> > Thanks, hopefully we can get to the bottom of this sooner rather
> > than later
> 
> I hope so too :)
>  
> > With regards to pcmcia-modules-2.4.26-i386. 
> > I notice that pcmcia-modules-2.4.27-i386 exists and presumably works.
> > I've CCed the maintainer, Per Olofsson for comment.
> 
> Ok, either way, since 2.4.27 exists, I won't let pcmcia-modules-2.4.26 block
> removal.
>  
> > > >   kernel-latest-2.6-amd64
> > > 
> > > Ditto -- shouldn't this one be simply superseded by packages generated by a
> > > next upload of linux-2.6?
> > 
> > amd64 still doesn't seem to exist for linux-2.6, I'm not sure why,
> > perhaps I am just blind or looking in the wrong place
> > 
> > http://ftp2.jp.debian.org/debian/pool/main/l/linux-2.6/
> > 
> > However, once it is uploaded, it will have binary packages with
> > the same names as those previously produced by the
> > kernel-latest-2.6-amd64 source package. Does this mean that
> > kernel-latest-2.6-amd64 will automatically be removed, or automatically
> > flagged for removal? 
> 
> Yes, if all binary packages of a give source package are 'hijacked' by another
> package, the source package will be automatically flagged for removal, and
> packages automatically flagged for removal will be removed by an ftp-team
> member every few days.
> 
> So, no action needed, and not removing will ensure a smooth transition.

Thanks, I'll prepare a fresh list for you ASAP.

-- 
Horms