Re: kernels

[Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com>]

* Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> [2004-02-15 11:58]:
> > > 04:04 <mdz> testing has 7 kernel-source and 34 kernel-image!
> > > 04:04 <mdz> so it is worse in sarge
> > > 04:04 <tbm> 7 kernel-source!?!
> > > 04:05 <tbm> can you paste a list
> > > 04:05 <mdz> Package: kernel-source-2.2.20
> > > 04:05 <mdz> Package: kernel-source-2.2.25
> > > 04:05 <mdz> Package: kernel-source-2.4.19
> > > 04:05 <mdz> Package: kernel-source-2.4.20
> > > 04:05 <mdz> Package: kernel-source-2.4.21
> > > 04:05 <mdz> Package: kernel-source-2.4.22
> > > 04:05 <mdz> Package: kernel-source-2.6.0-test9
> > > 04:06 <mdz> 2.2.20 is obsoleted by .25
> > > 04:06 <mdz> and should be removed
> > > 04:06 <mdz> likewise for 2.4.x x<22
> > > 04:06 <mdz> 2.6.0-test9 should never have entered testing in the first place
> > > 04:10 <tbm> hm, have to leave
> > > 04:10 <tbm> I'll check this out later
> > 
> > So what are we doing about this?  Are you going to look into it, shall I?
> 
> At this point we should remove at least all kernels 2.2.x x<25, 2.4.x x<24
> and 2.6.x x<2 from unstable because they contain known vulnerabilities with
> released exploits.  My understanding is that they will disappear from
> testing if they have no reverse depends when they are removed from unstable.
> 
> Shouldn't the maintainers of these packages be watching over this?
> 
> Since we talked, the situation has gotten much worse.  We now have 11
> kernel-source packages in sarge and unstable.  2.2.20 seems to be removed
> from unstable, and 2.6.2 added, but the rest are present in both testing and
> unstable.

I don't have much time for this at the moment, so perhaps someone else
on debian-qa could look into this.  Which of these kernel packages are
actually needed and which can be removed.  This will need some
research since certain (sub-)architectures often have various strange
requirements.

-- 
Martin Michlmayr
tbm@cyrius.com