Re: Dist-Uprade on HPPA64
At Tue, 30 Nov 2004 16:01:11 +0100,
Martin Zobel-Helas wrote:
> On Tuesday, 30 Nov 2004, you wrote:
> > On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 02:19:21PM +0100, Andreas Barth wrote:
> > > Well, IIRC, it is enough to use _only_ the 32bit kernel, and that would
> > > make it easier for us, because we don't need an extra package in the
> > > archive. But yes, your reason is also strong. Ok, so I tend to go to the
> > > backported modutils. Unless somebody vetoes me, I'll try to handle that
> > > with the modutils maintainer.
> > Some machines cannot run a 32 bit kernel, so the "easier" idea will not work.
> > Personally, I think the libc dependencies are unnecessarily tight. Maybe
> > someone should test overriding libc's kernel version test, and running a
> > new libc on woody's kernel instead?
> so we would have an other round of tool-chain-changes....
Yes. It's serious problem, so I'm considering how to fix this
problem. I think there're two area to work for this issue:
(1) Some upgrades are not critical for the running system (ex:
mips). In that case, we just warn in libc6.preinst, and then
user should change hes kernel version after upgrade. I don't
know old hppa64 is "critical" with the latest libc6
2.3.2.ds1-18. Do you know about it?
(2) We should prepare upgrade-* dir that has newer version initrd
and so on compiled with woody's libc6 for such architectures.