On Mon, 2014-08-04 at 12:14 +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > Hello, > > Holger Wansing, le Mon 04 Aug 2014 11:55:43 +0200, a écrit : > > Please note that I have added an entity for the default kernel series > > shipped with the respective release. > > Would it be worse to add such an entity? > > I'm actually surprised it wasn't there already.: > > > Is 3.14 kernel for Jessie correct? > > Recent mails said it'd rather be 3.16 > > > Index: en/appendix/files.xml > > =================================================================== > > --- en/appendix/files.xml (Revision 69218) > > +++ en/appendix/files.xml (Arbeitskopie) > > @@ -202,7 +202,8 @@ > > <para> > > > > A standard installation for the amd64 architecture, including all standard > > -packages and using the default 2.6 kernel, takes up &std-system-size;MB of disk space. > > +packages and using the default &linuxkernelseries-ver; kernel, takes up to > > +&std-system-size;MB of disk space. > > A minimal base installation, without the <quote>Standard system</quote> > > task selected, will take &base-system-size;MB. > > Well, I'm not sure it's actually useful to mention the kernel version > at all actually. Mentioning the precise version (3.16) seems really > pointless at least. Agree, this was only important for the big jump from 2.4 to 2.6. > > Index: en/install-methods/tftp/rarp.xml > > =================================================================== > > --- en/install-methods/tftp/rarp.xml (Revision 69218) > > +++ en/install-methods/tftp/rarp.xml (Arbeitskopie) > > @@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ > > > > </para><para> > > > > -On a RARP server system using a Linux 2.4 or 2.6 kernel, or Solaris/SunOS, > > +On a RARP server system using a Linux 2.4, 2.6 or 3.x kernel, or Solaris/SunOS, > > I would rather patch into "Linux 2.4 and further". The functionality is > not to go away any time soon, even in a 4.x etc. timeframe. Just say Linux; there's no point in making a version distinction here. > > =================================================================== > > --- en/partitioning/tree.xml (Revision 69218) > > +++ en/partitioning/tree.xml (Arbeitskopie) > > @@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ > > <entry>Mount point for mounting a file system temporarily</entry> > > </row><row> > > <entry><filename>proc</filename></entry> > > - <entry>Virtual directory for system information (2.4 and 2.6 kernels)</entry> > > + <entry>Virtual directory for system information (2.4, 2.6 and 3.x kernels)</entry> > > I wouldn't even mention the version: I've seen /proc for as long as I > can remember. I agree. > > @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ > > <entry>Essential system binaries</entry> > > </row><row> > > <entry><filename>sys</filename></entry> > > - <entry>Virtual directory for system information (2.6 kernels)</entry> > > + <entry>Virtual directory for system information (2.6 and 3.x kernels)</entry> > > I'd rather patch into "Linux 2.6 and further", I don't think /sys is to > go away. I agree. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Tomorrow will be cancelled due to lack of interest.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part