Re: 3.0r3

[Bdale Garbee <bdale@gag.com>]

cjwatson@debian.org (Colin Watson) writes:

> This is not a matter of upgrading the boot disk images used in woody.
> It's a matter of syncing up the source used to build the already-working
> images. It would be much better if this could happen without the
> necessity for 3.0.24 or whatever, since there really should be no need
> to get all architectures to rebuild boot-floppies just to tweak woody's
> Packages and Sources files.

Sounds right to me.

Separate, but related, question.  Is it ok for us to do a bin-NMU'ish build
of boot-floppies for ia64 so that we can move to a new kernel image on a woody
point release?  We would *really* like to get rid of the 2.4.17 bits in woody
and replace them with a fresher 2.4 version that works on more ia64 systems and
has been better tested...  When we released woody, precious few ia64 systems
were "in the wild" and we've learned a lot since then...

Bdale