Joey Hess wrote: > Bastian Blank wrote: > > On Sun, Jun 18, 2006 at 04:10:30PM -0600, dann frazier wrote: > > > The only technical issue is getting the meta packages to play well. I > > > think rough consensus was to leave the metapackages as-is in > > > linux-2.6.16 and either 1) drop meta packages from linux-2.6 >= 2.6.17 > > > or 2) create separate metapackages for linux-2.6 (linux-image-2.6-686-sid, > > > for example). > > > > AFAIK the plan is the following: > > - linux-2.6 remains the metapackages, the point to the last available > > one. > > - linux-2.6.16 contains no metapackages. > > - linux-latest-2.6 or so contains the metapackages to match linux-2.6.16 > > and have to go through t-p-u. > > As mentioned on #debian-boot, this is going to cause a lot of pain for > d-i. Why not do it dannf's way? Excuse me, I missed the first point. If the linux-2.6 metapackages are still in testing and point to the right kenrel for testing, we're good to go. -- see shy jo
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature