Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel
This one time, at band camp, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>Jamie Wilkinson wrote:
>
>>I do not expect Robert's package to make any more of an attempt to convince
>>you a reboot is required than any of the other kernel packages.
>
>The current kernel packages include the version number in the package
>name, whereas Robert seems to be suggesting that his package would
>maintain the same name. As a result, if I upgrade a stable box, I'm
>going to need to reboot the system, whereas currently I can upgrade
>everything other than the kernel and then deal with the kernel at my
>leisure. I think this is a regression.
I think your assumption is probably false. There are maintainer scripts in
pacakges for a reason. There are init scripts. I'm surprised I have to
explain this to you.
I also wonder how many participants in this thread who have voiced valid
concerns also have an idea for how to go about solving those concerns, but
are too interested in tearing Robert apart than offering useful advice.
--
This thread scored 3 Trogdors out of a possible 5 in flamability.
Reply to: