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

Re: Rethinking stable updates policy

On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 09:57:37AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> John Goerzen wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 08:43:53AM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > John Goerzen wrote:
> > > > Examples of things that should happen in stable, but haven't been
> > > > happening reliably:
> > > > 
> > > >  * Kernel updates with more broad hardware support
> > > 
> > > This requires new kernel packages, new utilities and a new installer.
> > > It a hell of an effort to get this done.  Just look at what it takes
> > > to update these in stable with "only" security updates.
> > 
> > New kernel packages, and a rebuilt install image, yes.  New utilities?
> > Which utilities?
> I already forgot most of them again, but among the packages required were:
> mkinitrd

mkinitrd is dead :)

> kernel-package

well, one could consider kernel-package as part of the kernel package, really.

> debhelper

debhelper ???

> yard

yaird is its name.

> Just try to get a more recent kernel from backports.org on a sarge
> machine and you'll see.

Actually, apart from the udev issue, only a recompiled yaird is needed to run
the latest sid kernel on a sarge machine.

I am actually typing this, on a sarge/powerpc machine, where the latest sid
kernels was installed as is on a sarge system with only the rebuild yaird. 

Naturally, initramfs-tools and is huge dependency chain on world+dog is a
fully other matter.

> > The only one I'm aware of that breaks with newer kernels is udev, and
> > hasn't that been fixed for awhile now?
> Oh, right.  udev as well.  I prayed for the machine to boot as it was
> in a data center several km away from me.  *sweat*

Yes, we should get a backported udev with more stability going or something.
Udev is the real pain on this, and since initramfs-tools needs it ...

> > I'm not talking about something like 2.4 to 2.6, just point releases
> > within 2.6.
> I'm talking about 2.6.8 (sarge) to 2.6.15 (current kernel that time)

yeah, udev sucks, but apart from that it should be transparent.


Sven Luther

Reply to: