Re: 2.6 kernel removals

[Jens Schmalzing <j.s@lmu.de>]

Hi,

Frederik Schueler writes:

> Could you rename the flavours in order to close #260003?  (Yes I
> know that bug is for 2.4 but it concerns all alpha kernels).

As long as the source package is named appropriately (which it is) and
builds the packages for the alpha architecture only (which it does), I
don't see the danger of a namespace conflict at all.  But then, I
probably haven't fully understood the following:

| Package names are global across architectures

Does this mean that two source packages must not build the same binary
package, even if they do so for different architectures?

> We would have alpha-generic and alpha-smp kernel flavours then.

Just alpha instead of alpha-generic would be closer to what other
architectures do (like, there's i686 and i686-smp, power4 and
power4-smp, mckinley and mckinley-smp, sun4u and sun4u-smp etc).

Regards, Jens.

-- 
J'qbpbe, le m'en fquz pe j'qbpbe!
Le veux aimeb et mqubib panz je pézqbpbe je djuz tqtaj!