On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 05:26:27PM +0000, Stephen Gran wrote: > This one time, at band camp, Marco d'Itri said: > > sgran@debian.org wrote: > > >In this case, does it make any sense to treat the two versions of udev > > >similarly to how we treat library transitions? I.e., rename the new > > >udev to udev-$min-kernel-ver or something? (the name is ugly, but > > >you > > It's not clear which problem this would solve, exactly. > It could solve the 'I have overwritten the udev that worked with this > kernel with a udev that dies and leaves me unable to function' problem. > It is not a perfect idea, and I don't particularly like it (for > aesthetic reasons if nothing else). But if the best we can do is run > time checks to determine which kernel we are running on, then we may > need to support multiple udev versions. The difficulty is in allowing multiple such udev packages to coexist sensibly on the filesystem. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. vorlon@debian.org http://www.debian.org/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature