Bug#627566: rough transition to 486
>>>>> "BH" == Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> writes:
BH> I wonder why you had both linux-image-686 and linux-image-2.6-686
BH> installed. They are redundant with each other.
Well, can you please mention that in
aptitude show linux-image-2.6-486 linux-image-486
else sooner or later over the years one will end up with both installed.
Also why not make them conflict.
Apparently one will poop out when linux 2.8 comes out, one wont. Anyway,
you need to mention something in their Descriptions. Else sooner or
later one will install both because nobody knows what the master plan is
because it is not in the Descriptions.
BH> You don't *need* to remove the other packages to continue, but then they
BH> have no use. So I agree the message could be improved.
Very much should remove unless ones traditional tiny root partition is
just to collect bulky junk.
>> Removing symbolic link initrd.img.old
>> You may need to re-run your boot loader
BH> These warnings are about compatibility with LILO and other dumb boot
BH> loaders. I would love to get rid of the warnings, but so long as they
BH> rely on these symlinks by default we can't reasonably do so.
It would be nice if the was a message 'OK, fixed', because indeed it
does then fix them, it just doesn't mention it. So we go looking, all
worried, only to find that it already just fixed it.
Reply to: