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

Re: [SPAM] Re: Kernel 2.6.15-4 freeze

Hash: SHA1

I have noticed an unusual naming situation with the Debian 2.6.15-x
series of kernel updates on my HP Pavilion zv6000 series (amd64 3200+)

The usual situation I have come to expect with installing a kernel
update under Debian using grub is to have the kernel name, shown as the
installed version in the dselect listing,
  eg.: linux-image-2.6.15-1,
be reflected in the boot menu (from /boot/grub/menu.lst),
  eg.: Debian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.15-1-amd64-k8

However, I note, since the kernel update to the Debian -2, the listing
in the grub menu has not changed. I now (suposedly) have the 2.6.15-4
version of the Debian linux-image installed according to the dselect
listing, but there is no other indication that the -4 update is
installed. Here are examples of the strings I get identifying the
installed and running kernel:

$ uname -a
Linux caleb 2.6.15-1-amd64-k8 #2 Sat Feb 4 00:09:56 UTC 2006\
 x86_64 GNU/Linux

(title of default kernel in grub's menu.lst)
Debian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.15-1-amd64-k8

(there are three lines in dselect that refer to the currently installed
kernel. The first is the update depends pseudo/meta package:)
linux-image-2.6-amd64-k8 - Linux kernel 2.6 image on AMD64 K8 machines
(with the comment:)
This package depends on the latest binary image for Linux kernel 2.6 on
64bit AMD Athlon64, AthlonFX, Opteron1xx and Turion64 machines.
(under the Inst.ver and Avail.ver columns, it shows:)
(the next line in the listing is apparently the real kernel image. It
show the following:)
linux-image-s.2.15-1-amd64-k8 - Linux kernel 2.6.15 image\
 on AMD64 K8 machines
(under the Inst.ver and Avail.ver columns, it shows:)
(finally, the third line shows:)
linux-image-amd64-k8 - Linux kernel image on AMD64 K8 machines
(under the Inst.ver and Avail.ver columns, it shows:)

I am just wondering why the current Debian version is not reflected in
all the listings. Is this a problem? Should I be conserned? Should I
change something in my setup? Should I just ingore this and unimportant
and let the dd's get on with the important things in Debian?

With a sincere desire to learn, fgd.

Ken Bloom wrote:
> Chaim Keren Tzion wrote:
>>Ken Bloom wrote:
>>>Did you reboot after upgrading to 2.6.15-4? That upgrade happened for me
>>>this morning, and the upgrade warned that I would need to reboot, so I
>>Can I ask what you meant by "That upgrade happened for me..."
>>How do you set up an automatic kernel upgrade which doesn't seem to
>>exist in the repositories? (At least not the repositories that I use) In
>>fact I only see 2.6.15-3 at kernel.org. Where is 2.6.15-4 from?
> The correct number for Kernel.org's version is, not 2.6.15-3.
> The latter uses a debian revision and indicates the version of the
> kernel in Debian. While my AMD64 laptop is currently running a 2.6.14
> kernel, my i386 desktop is running kernel 2.6.15-4, and upgraded to that
> version yesterday morning, replacing version 2.6.15-3, in accordance
> with some kind of policy that really minor kernel upgrades are allowed
> to keep the same package name and increase the version number. That
> policy seems odd though.
> --Ken Bloom

- --
Fielder George Dowding, Chief Iceworm        .^.   Debian/GNU Linux
dba Iceworm Enterprises, Anchorage, Alaska   /v\   "etch" Testing
Since 1976 - Over 25 Years of Service.      /( )\  User Number 269482
                                            ^^-^^  "irad" 301256
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Reply to: