On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 09:04:05AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > Martin Schulze wrote: > > Only a few people will probably have noticed the mess resulting from > > tons of different kernel packages in the stable (and unstable) > > distribution. Not only there are several versions of kernel source in > > each architecture, they are also different for most architectures. > > Only mips and mipsel share the same kernel source. > > > > To make it worse, there are also third party kernel modules that > > depend on a particular version of the kernel source (they don't depend > > on the particular Debian revision, though, I hope). > > > > As a result of this, it is almost impossible to update the kernel in a > > released Debian distribution. > > Manoj emphasized[1] that using one single kernel source package per > kernel version and maintaining several patch packages for each > architecture which finally build our kernel-image-$version packages is > possible. > > However, Herbert Xu hasn't contributed to this thread yet and most of > our architecture maintainers haven't raised a word either. These are > most probably the people who will continue to do the work, and hence, > need our support if the kernel source tree should be consolidated. Well, okay, this is only semi-ontopic for the thread, but as the person currently working in ~/Debian-Packages/netbsd-kernel-*, I'll speak up: I'm trying very hard to arrange that we don't repeat the misfeatures of this particular past. This is, granted, far easier than for Linux, since there isn't really a concept of a 'separate arch repository' to be out of sync, on NetBSD. (No, this isn't pimping it; I don't even have it compiling yet.) That said, I firmly believe the idea is one with merit, even if it won't be easy. -- Joel Baker <fenton@debian.org>
Attachment:
pgpduMSqUdIfe.pgp
Description: PGP signature