[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#548466: real kernel is undependable



On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 16:06 +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Package: linux-latest-2.6
> Version: 2.6.30+20
> Severity: wishlist
> 
> linux-image-amd64 and linux-image-2.6-amd64 seem to be pretty
> fragile. Every other day their dependency to the "real" kernel
> package is broken, because the kernel has been updated and
> linux-latest-2.6 is not in sync.
> 
> Do you think it would be possible to increase the stability of
> these packages wrt. the dependencies? I would like to have a
> reliable way to install a kernel without knowing the version
> information.
> 
> AFAICS there are several options:
> 
> - merge the source packages for linux-latest-26 and linux-2.6,
>    making sure the packages are in sync
>
> - make linux-image-amd64 a virtual package provided by the "real"
>    kernel, or create a new virtual package for this purpose

The separation between linux-2.6 and linux-latest-2.6 allows for a later
kernel version to be added to a suite without replacing the previous
one, as with 2.6.24 added in etch-and-1/2.  Neither of these options can
achieve that.

> - don't put too much version information into the name of the
>    "real" kernel package, and use the debian version number
>    instead

No, the binary package names must change for every ABI change, just as
for shared libraries.

> Surely there are other options that I do not see.
> 
> 
> It would be very nice if this problem could be resolved.

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


Reply to: