Re: Difference between linux-image-3.2.0-0.bpo.1-amd64 linux-image-3.2.0-0.bpo.2-amd64

[Stuart Prescott <stuart@nanonanonano.net>]

Thomas Goirand wrote:
> By the way, could kernel developers switch to the more standard system?
> Why isn't the kernel backport using 3.2.0-2~bpo60+2 as version number?

You'll find that the kernel maintainers *are* using that version number 
scheme:

$ apt-cache policy linux-image-3.2.0-0.bpo.2-686-pae:
  Installed: 3.2.18-1~bpo60+1
  Candidate: 3.2.18-1~bpo60+1
  Version table:
 *** 3.2.18-1~bpo60+1 0
        100 http://backports.debian.org/debian-backports/ squeeze-
backports/main i386 Packages
        100 /var/lib/dpkg/status

Your lesson in Debian version string comparison, while correct, doesn't 
actually answer the question asked.

Kernel packages also carry information in their package name, which is what 
the original poster was asking about. In particular, the maintainers have an 
ABI string that helps track breakage of locally compiled out-of-tree 
modules.

	http://wiki.debian.org/DebianKernelABIChanges

So sid current has kernel packages with names like:

	linux-image-3.2.0-2-686-pae

where "2" is the ABI number; this package has a version string of 
"3.2.19-1". On the other hand, squeeze-backports kernel shown above has an 
ABI of "0.bpo.2". I guess it's important to be able to identify backports 
kernels easily and to track this as a backports ABI but yes, it does make 
for a long and overly complex package name (not package version).

cheers
Stuart

-- 
Stuart Prescott                 www.nanoNANOnano.net