Re: Two proposals for a better Lenny (testing related).
Qua, 2007-06-13 às 18:09 -0400, Felipe Sateler escreveu:
> Luis Matos wrote:
>
> > Qua, 2007-06-13 às 14:16 -0700, Russ Allbery escreveu:
> >> Luis Matos <gass@otiliamatos.ath.cx> writes:
> >>
> >> > but why should I??? this goes against the "testing is always *WORKING*"
> >> > phrase. TESTING IS NOT ALWAYS WORKING.
> >>
> >> Having to use module-assistant != not working.
> >
> > having a working system *with* only debian *oficial* packages and then
> > after an upgrade that system stops working properly, i call it a
> > regression ...
>
> Installing a newer kernel is not an upgrade, in a sense. You are installing
> new software alongside the old one. Thus the usual expectations don't hold.
the usual expectation that i have with a new kernel is to improve my
operating system ... that includes no regressions on supporting my
hardware - for example, wifi or graphic card.
>
> PS: I do agree that it would be nice if there was a way to automatically
> bring in the modules you are using for the new version, or at least warn,
> but I can't seem to figure out a nice and elegant way of doing that. And
> no, more people using testing won't fix this issue either.
what about checking the *-modules-2.6.A packages available and compare
them with the previous version?
if the count of both are equal, then kernel *and* modules can go into
testing. If, for some reason a module is not available or cannot migrate
into testing, kernel would not migrate.
>
>
> --
>
> Felipe Sateler
>
>
Reply to: