Bug#341104: marked as done (linux-patch-debian-2.6.14: dropping EXTRAVERSION from official kernel patches)
Your message dated Fri, 10 Nov 2006 11:39:07 +0100
with message-id <20061110103907.GC30153@baikonur.stro.at>
and subject line Bug#341104: close 341104
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--- Begin Message ---
- To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
- Subject: linux-patch-debian-2.6.14: dropping EXTRAVERSION from official kernel patches
- From: "Pascal A. Dupuis" <pdupuis@esat.kuleuven.ac.be>
- Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 14:04:12 +0100
- Message-id: <20051128130412.A2E801C2FD@electa-30.esat.kuleuven.be>
Package: linux-patch-debian-2.6.14
Version: 2.6.14-4
Severity: minor
Hello,
I've just compiled a new kernel from
linux-patch-debian-2.6.14_2.6.14-4_all.deb,
and I noticed this includes the official patches 2.6.14.1 up to
2.6.14.3, except from the extraversion. So, by default the new kernel
will be called vmlinuz-2.6.14, possibly overriding a previous
2.6.14. Furthermore, it is difficult to tell which version you
run exactly. The fix is to run make-kpkg as:
make-kpkg --added-patches debian --append-to-version ".3" kernel-image
modules-image
Is there some good reason to drop the EXTRAVERSION from official
patches ? Why not keep it, or even modify it as something like
".3-debian" so that a 'uname -a' will make clear that the actual
kernel is a 2.6.14, patched up to interim revision .3, and with
specific debian patches ?
Pascal Dupuis
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
APT prefers testing
APT policy: (500, 'testing'), (500, 'stable')
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Shell: /bin/sh linked to /bin/bash
Kernel: Linux 2.6.14.3
Locale: LANG=fr_BE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=fr_BE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8)
Versions of packages linux-patch-debian-2.6.14 depends on:
ii bash 3.0-17 The GNU Bourne Again SHell
ii bzip2 1.0.2-10 high-quality block-sorting file co
ii grep-dctrl 2.6.7 Grep Debian package information
ii patch 2.5.9-2 Apply a diff file to an original
linux-patch-debian-2.6.14 recommends no packages.
-- no debconf information
Disclaimer: http://www.kuleuven.be/cwis/email_disclaimer.htm
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Version: 2.6.18-1
On Fri, Nov 10, 2006 at 10:10:59AM +0100, Pascal Dupuis wrote:
> Hello,
> According to the submission date, this one is rather old, used at the
> time of 2.6.14. Now, at 2.6.18, I removed the fixes applied to
> /proc/acpi/thermal_zone/THRM/, rebooted, and ... no problems. I
> suppose they where fixed at some points. 2.6.18-1 from unstable is OK.
>
> Best regards
>
> Pascal Dupuis
>
> --
> Dr. ir. Pascal Dupuis, conseiller technologique/technological advisor
> U. C. Louvain AC/ADRE : http://www.adre.ucl.ac.be/
> Place de L'Université, 1; B-1348 Louvain-la-Neuve Belgium
> Tél. +32-10-47 92 33; Fax +32-10-47 48 30
thanks for your feedback, closing.
--
maks
--- End Message ---
Reply to: