On Tuesday 06 June 2006 18:01, dann frazier wrote: > I believed aba, joeyh & fjp were all in on this decision, but apologies > if it didn't get communicated back to everyone involved. That's right, aba agreed to this plan as representative of the stable release team. Also, I posted an update about this in [1]. I also posted proposed patches needed for d-i itself in that mail. I seem to remember though that the security update was planned for the end of Debconf, so I was a bit surprised when reading my mail backlog this week that it is not out yet. What is the full status of the updates for Sarge for both 2.4 and 2.6? A release using sarge2 kernels would have been logical if the kernel udebs would have been available in t-p-u earlier than was the case. With all the holidays planned after debconf the timing for the remaining work was rather unfortunate. ATM waiting for sarge3 still seems more logical. Personally, I can only go full speed on this once I get back home next week. > Personally, I don't care which kernel gets used - that's a > stable-release/d-i decision in my opinion. However, I do not think we > should delay the release of the sarge3 kernel to security.debian.org - > I want to avoid any situation that would prevent us from doing timely > security updates. > > If you decide to stick with sarge2 for r3, would an upload of sarge3 to > security.debian.org break this? As I understand it, sarge2 is already > in the queue archive for stable, so those bits would still be > available? As kernel udebs are built manually it is entirely up to the person doing the build to make sure that the correct kernel version is installed on the machine used for the builds. On Tuesday 06 June 2006 18:56, Martin Schulze wrote: > However, if kernel udebs should be part of the security update, then > we'll need proper source packages that build these udebs - or, if > these already exist, a pointer which source package has been forgotton > in the last kernel update rounds. No, I don't think that really makes sense as just building the kernel udebs would not get them to the users. You need to release the installer as a whole for that. Cheers, FJP [1] <200605170816.13783.elendil@planet.nl>
Attachment:
pgprSym6QfS9x.pgp
Description: PGP signature