Re: Rethinking stable updates policy

[Martin Schulze <joey@infodrom.org>]

Martin Schulze 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.

Since I've had to update the kernel on a machine to a more recent one
and used Debian packaging, here's what was required only to get the
binary package installed:

http://www.backports.org sarge-backports/main module-init-tools 3.2.2-2bpo1 [79.3kB]
http://www.backports.org sarge-backports/main makedev 2.3.1-81bpo1 [42.0kB]
http://www.backports.org sarge-backports/main libklibc 1.4.11-2bpo1 [41.1kB]
http://www.backports.org sarge-backports/main klibc-utils 1.4.11-2bpo1 [144kB]
http://www.backports.org sarge-backports/main libvolume-id0 0.093-0bpo1 [56.6kB]
http://www.backports.org sarge-backports/main udev 0.093-0bpo1 [253kB]
http://www.backports.org sarge-backports/main initramfs-tools 0.75~bpo.1 [52.9kB]

So it's not only the kernel but half a dozen more packages.  Even more
are required if you want to be able to compile the kernel package as
well.

Regards,

	Joey

-- 
In the beginning was the word, and the word was content-type: text/plain