On Sun, 2011-01-30 at 21:02 +0000, Justin B Rye wrote:
> (Or unless blah blah manual kernel upgrade blah blah udev, but since
> nobody's answering that question I'll assume it's a "no".)
I saw this question before, meant to come back to it, and forgot, sorry!
Earlier, Justin wrote:
> Mind you, how does this interact with the requirement in the generic
> upgrade procedure for a kernel change to handle udev? Might that fix
> it, if xen users are going to need a 2.6.32 xen kernel with extra
> metapackaginess before they can upgrade the rest of the system?
WRT their interactions with udev and such the linux-image-*xen packages
are just another kernel package so if their is some generic constraint
in the upgrade process due to udev then they are also subject to it.
However I don't think the manual installation of
linux-image-2.6.32-5-xen-{686,amd64} step would be sufficient to pull in
the rest of the Xen upgrade. In particular I am reasonably (but not
totally) sure it won't pull in the xen-linux-system-2.6-{686,amd64}
meta-package or the hypervisor update.
Doing the "manually install xen-linux-system-2.6-xen-{686,amd64}"
installation step at the same stage that any manual kernel installation
step would be done seems like the right thing to do to me.
Ian.
--
Ian Campbell
A lot of people I know believe in positive thinking, and so do I. I
believe everything positively stinks.
-- Lew Col
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part