Bug#428783: linux-latest-2.6: Use new Breaks field to avoid installing new kernel image if old packaged modules are installed
On Tue, Jun 26, 2007 at 11:14:24PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 10:46:04AM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> > Indeed, and the version of the metapackages doesn't include an explicit
> > reference to the ABI. IMO it should, then we could do:
> > Depends: linux-image-2.6-686 (>= 2.6.21-1), linux-image-2.6-686 (<< 2.6.21-2)
> 2.6.21-1 <= 2.6.21-1-1 <= 2.6.21-2? I doubt it.
Raphaël addressed this.
> And the linux-2.6 version also don't describe the abi.
Indeed, but in that case the information is encoded in the package name
instead; there's no reason to encode it again in the version number.
> > Currently you have to lookup the changelog of linux-image-2.6-686 to know
> > the ABI it corresponds to, which is somehow inconvenient.
> No, the depends clearly stats which abi this is.
There is no way to express that a module meta package depends on "this ABI
version of module foo, and any linux-image-2.6-$flavor that depends on this
ABI version of linux-image."
Today, the available choices for the dependencies are:
Depends: foo-module-2.6.21-4-686, linux-image-2.6-686
Depends: foo-module-2.6.21-4-686, linux-image-2.6.21-4-686
Neither ensures that linux-image-2.6-686 and foo-module-2.6-686 are upgraded
together, which is what is being asked for. This is a desirable goal,
because without this constraint, users who have both packages installed may
have linux-image-2.6-686 upgraded before the new version of
foo-module-2.6-686 is available, rendering their system unusable on reboot.
AFAICS, the best way to achieve this is to include the ABI information in
the version number of the linux-image metapackage.
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.