I wondered what was the status of switching d-i to the 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 kernels, so I prepared this table. The four sets of kernel versions are those used by linux-kernel-di to produce udebs, the version set in build/config to use those udebs for the installer boot images, the fallback value set for some arches in rootskel for the kernel-image deb to install, and the kernel versions hardcoded (!) into base-installer for kernel-images to install. One thing I didn't check is the status of kernel-images propigating the testing for the new kernels. The rootskel and base-installer kernel versions need to track that. arch linux-kernel-di build/config rootskel base-installer i386 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.27/2.6.8/2.4.26 [1] 2.4.26/2.6.7 [6] alpha 2.4.27 2.4.26 [2] 2.4.26 amd64 2.6.8 2.6.8 arm 2.4.27 2.4.27 hppa 2.4.25 [3] 2.4.25 [3] 2.4.20 [7] 2.4.26 [10] ia64 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.25 [8] m68k 2.2.25/2.4.27 2.2.25/2.4.26 [4] mips 2.4.27 2.4.27 mipsel 2.4.27 2.4.27 powerpc 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.25/2.6.7 [11] apus 2.4.25 [5] 2.4.25 [5] 2.4.25 s390 2.4.27 2.4.27 2.4.21 [9] sparc 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.27 [1] i386 speakup build still using old 2.4.26 udebs, new speakup kernel too big (I plan to fix this today somehow) [2] alpha build not using new udebs [3] hppa far out of date [4] m68k build not using new udebs, or is it? The common-kernels file has 2.4.27, but the other .cfgs mention 2.4.26. Mess.. [5] powerpc/apus still using old kernel [6] New i386 kernel-image in testing, waiting on 2.6.8 to update i386 installed kernels. [7] Obviously this is only a fallback, but 2.4.20?! [8] 2.4.27 is in testing, rootskel needs update [9] Again, it's only a fallback. But having a fallback is useless and may be harmful if it's not up-to-date... [10] Note this is newer than the version used by the installer for hppa. [11] Note this is older than the version used by the installer for powerpc. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature