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

Re: Reorganizing packages



On Tue, Aug 21, 2007 at 07:08:47PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> Hi folks

> * Rename linux(-[-a-z]+|)-2.6 into linux\1.
> * Drop the 2.6 version identifier from meta packages:

>   Package: linux-image-686
>   Provides: linux-image, linux-latest-modules-2.6.22-1-686
>   Depends: linux-image-2.6.22-1-686

>   Package: linux-headers-686
>   Provides: linux-headers
>   Depends: linux-headers-2.6.22-1-686

>   Package: unionfs-modules-686
>   Provides: unionfs-modules
>   Depends: unionfs-modules-2.6.22-1-686, linux-latest-modules-2.6.22-1-686

I object; if and when there ever is a new upstream kernel branch that we
want to track separately this would have to be reverted, and in the meantime
it would cause more confusion and work because of the need to shuffle the
transition packages for users to get a smooth upgrade from etch.

The -2.6 doesn't hurt anything, I recommend leaving it as-is.

> * Drop duplicated xen identifier from xen-linux-system:

>   Package: xen-linux-system-2.6.18-4-686
>   Depends: linux-image-2.6.18-4-xen-686 (= ${binary:Version}), xen-hypervisor-3.0.3-1-i386-pae

That seems like a good improvement.  It doesn't require changes to the
source package name, so is less disruptive on that front; and changes to xen
binary package names have less effect on the rest of the system (e.g., the
installer).

> * Add meta packages for xen-linux-system:

>   Package: xen-linux-system-686
>   Provides: xen-linux-system
>   Depends: xen-linux-system-2.6.18-4-686, linux-image-686 (= ${binary:Version})

Also seems fair to me.

Cheers,
-- 
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: