Re: Another pcmcia-cs NMU
On Wed, Mar 10, 2004 at 15:29 -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> I had not realized that pcmcia-cs in sarge was so insanely out of date.
Yeah, that's why I wanted to fix the package in the first place.
> pcmcia-cs (source, alpha, arm, i386, ia64, powerpc) is buggy! (1 > 0)
I don't think this line was there before. The bug in question is
tagged woody so it shouldn't be counted. I suspect that this is the
same problem that Björn is asking about.
> I wonder why it thinks the pcmcia-modules packages are out of date?
The problem is, I think, that all the pcmcia-modules-* packages use
pcmcia-cs as their source package. This means that if their version
numbers are behind that of the source, they will be considered
out-of-date, because we only rebuild the modules for the latest
kernel. The obvious solution would be to have a separate source
package for each module set, e.g. pcmcia-modules-2.4.25-i386. Brian
didn't like this because these packages would mostly be copies of the
kernel-image-* packages, but I think that would be better than it is
now anyway.
> Maybe the old modules packages it lists need to be removed from unstable;
> the new 2.4.25 ones seem to have not been accepted yet though.
Yes, I have already filed bugs against ftp.debian.org (#234797 and
#236905).
--
Pelle
Reply to: