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

renaming linux-kernel source package


I'm going to suggest renaming our 2.6.12 source package from
linux-kernel-2.6.12 to linux-kernel-2.6.  Thoughts?  Dann Frazier and I
have discussed this on IRC a little bit, and come up w/ the following

  * Source: linux-kernel-2.6, Version: 2.6.12-1
  * As long as each arch is in synch, there are no GPL issues with older
    binary packages being in the archive w/out the source.
  * Nicer for bugs; http://packages.qa.debian.org/l/linux-kernel-2.6.html
    gets us all bugs for 2.6.12+ kernels, versus having to look at
    linux-kernel-2.6.12.html, linux-kernel-2.6.13.html, etc.
  * Older kernels get removed; no need to ask for manual removal of
    linux-kernel-2.6.12 after 2.6.13 becomes available for all archs. 
    However, we lose the ability to have multiple 2.6's in a release,
    which sounds like a win to me; we shouldn't be doing multiple 2.6
    releases anymore anyways, the security team has made it clear they
    don't want to support multiple kernels, and it would be extra pressure
    for all archs to keep up.
  * Testing would contain the latest kernel that built for all archs
    (archs that build out of the linux-kernel-2.6 package, anyways), while
    sid would contain the latest bleeding edge kernel which may or may not
    FTBFS for some archs.  In order to get the new kernel into testing,
    we'd have to either fix these issues or discuss dropping archs (which
    we're going to have to do anyways w/ single-source packaging).

Reply to: