Re: which kernel version for etch?
On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 11:02:29AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 10:15:45AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Wed, May 10, 2006 at 07:46:12AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > > - branch the current linux-2.6 package into a new source package, say
> > > > linux-2.6.16, tracking 2.6.16.x releases
> > > Sounds the right thing to do for me. We keep linux-2.6 as trunk package, and
> > > can branch off any number of kernel we want to have around long term, and mark
> > > it as linux-2.6.<x>. Problem is with the metapackages, where will they come
> > > from ? Bastian, can you comment on this ?
> >
> > Currently they are built from linux-2.6. This needs to be changed for
> > such a package. And after that, they need to be reintroduced through
> > t-p-u.
>
> Well, this means thought that they will no more be built with linux-2.6, right
> ?
>
> Why do you need to involve t-p-u, the current version in testing points to the
> linux-2.6 2.6.16-<something> which is compatible with the new packages. We
> just upload linux-2.6.16 to unstable and linux-2.6 without the metapackages,
> and they should migrate to testing normally or with an RM hint at the right
> moment, no ?
The problem Bastian maybe seeing is that we cannot have the same binary
package (e.g., linux-image-2.6-686) provided by two different source
packages in a single dist.
So, we'd need to remove them from linux-2.6.16 till linux-2.6.16 hits testing,
drop linux-2.6.16 from sid, then re-add via t-p-u.
Bastian: please correct me if I missed your point.
--
dann frazier
Reply to: