Re: Scheduling linux-2.6 2.6.18-9
On Sun, Dec 17, 2006 at 01:53:03PM +0100, Max Vozeler wrote:
> > The first two ABI changes are specific to extra kernel flavors that
> > aren't relevant to the installer and have few (if any?) extra modules
> > built for them.
> Actually, quite a few modules packages are being built for the
> vserver and xen flavours :
> main:
> spca5xx (linux-modules-extra-2.6)
> redhat-cluster (linux-modules-extra-2.6)
> squashfs (linux-modules-extra-2.6)
> loop-aes (loop-aes)
> contrib:
> ipw2100 (linux-modules-contrib-2.6)
> ipw2200 (linux-modules-contrib-2.6)
> ipw3945 (linux-modules-contrib-2.6)
> non-free:
> kqemu (linux-modules-nonfree-2.6)
> Unless I missed some, I think this concerns four source packages.
> I'm not sure if it would be possible to binNMU / force rebuild of
> those, but since linux-modules-* are maintained by the kernel team
> and loop-aes by myself, I think we could react quickly and rebuild
> them via normal sourceful uploads as well.
Yes, TTBOMK these packages could be binNMUed for a *silent* ABI change. For
an ABI change expressed in the package name, they would all need sourceful
uploads. If the name change extended to packages other than the xen/vserver
flavors (whether or not the ABI change also applied...), sourceful changes
would also be needed for each of the per-arch debian-installer kernel
packages, as well as linux-latest-2.6, linux-kbuild-2.6 (?), nvidia-*, and
perhaps others that don't occur to me.
But anyway, as cumbersome as renaming the kernel packages might be at this
stage, dragging out the decision would surely be even more cumbersome. If
the kernel team has decided to push forward with the ABI changes (I don't
know if this is the case, I haven't seen much response to my message
on-list?), it would certainly be better to get started on this sooner rather
than later.
Thanks,
--
Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world.
vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Reply to: