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

Re: kernel-image-2.6.8-ia64 ABI reversion

dann frazier wrote:
> It seems to me that the best use of everyone's time would be for the
> kernel team to have an agreement with the security team that we will
> restrict changes to our 2.4.27/2.6.8 kernels in such a way that they can
> start with our unstable packages for sarge updates (with maybe a sarge
> toolchain rebuild).  This way we can keep doing security updates and
> uploading kernels to sid to get some testing, and if $deity forbid we
> need to do an rc4, we've got new bits prepared for that as well.
> There's no reason for us to be working w/ these kernel revs if our
> changes aren't going to make it into sarge.
> Security Team: is there a set of rules for our changes that would make a
> transition like this work?

No set of rules exist.

Security updates should be least intrusive.  However, some security updates
imply ABI changes which opens a can of worms (rebuilt modules needed, maybe
rebuilt d-i, rebuild udebs and the like).

I've also been told that many module packages aren't built the Debian
way with a .dsc file that can be used as basis for dpkg-buildpackage
or similar.  This makes the problem more difficult.



The only stupid question is the unasked one.

Please always Cc to me when replying to me on the lists.

Reply to: