Re: Outdated linux-2.6 backport
Ben Hutchings schrieb am Sunday, den 22. January 2012:
> On Sun, 2012-01-22 at 10:29 +0100, Marcus Osdoba wrote:
> > Am 18.01.2012 05:05, schrieb Ben Hutchings:
> > > On Wed, 2012-01-18 at 03:42 +0000, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > >> On Wed, 2012-01-18 at 00:40 +0100, Marcus Osdoba wrote:
> > > [...]
> > >>> Now that I finished with building up
> > >> [...]
> > >>> linux-image-3.1.0-1-486_3.1.8-2~bpo60+1_i386.deb
> > >>
> > >> This is wrong; modules built for '3.1.0-1-486' in testing/unstable will
> > >> not be loadable in a backported kernel due to the compiler version
> > >> change. (I don't believe that gcc 4.4 and 4.6 are at all incompatible,
> > >> but the module loader does check this.)
> > > [...]
> > >
> > > Hmm... I think it used to, but I don't see any sign that it does any
> > > more. But let's not test this.
> > >
> > Sorry, I didn't get this. I've downgraded the compiler for the
> > backported kernel to gcc 4.4.
> >
> > Thesis:
> > In general you won't have plain testing-packages if you just use
> > stable+stable-backports. So when compiling the 3.1.8-modules with the
> > same stable gcc (4.4) there is no gcc version mismatch within
> > stable+stable-backports (there is no gcc 4.6...)
>
> Right. But if the ABI number was left at 1, then it would be possible
> to have a mismatch.
>
> > So every additonal kernel module (besides those packaged inside
> > linux-image) need to be backported with the same gcc version.
>
> No, Debian now only packages source for out-of-tree modules. They are
> built on user systems by dkms or module-assistant.
>
> > Forgive me, if I got that completly wrong.
> >
> > Anyway, are there any news in the backport upload process? I still use
> > my own packages, but on the server I feel more comfortable with an
> > "official" version where more users may file bugs against.
>
> I'm waiting for my key to be added, as I've replaced my key since the
> last time I made backports.
in fact you wanted me to replace 12066207 with 95861109 (your ticket was a
little bit misleading).
I did this a few minutes ago.
Thanks for taking care of the kernel
Alex
Reply to: