On Wed, Aug 30, 2006 at 03:28:59PM -0400, Joey Hess wrote: > Steve Langasek wrote: > > Sorry Frans, but any current use of these packages is well overdue to be > > fixed. Given that kernel-source-2.4.27 is RC-buggy, I'm now working through > > getting its reverse-dependency tree removed from testing. > > > > Are there still architectures using 2.4 in d-i as of beta3? If so, why? > > Yes, i386 still includes 2.4 as an option as of beta3. It wasn't removed > before then because I hadn't had a clear statement from anyone that we > were ready to remove 2.4 before then. That support has been removed in > the dailys. If the 2.4 kernel images are removed from testing then > anyone who follows the docs for doing a 2.4 install with beta3 will have > it fail at one point or another. As I remember it, I was told not to make the change to drop 2.2/2.4 until after beta 3. I believe it was to make sure we didn't accidentally delay the release or something. In any case, the m68k dailies have already moved to 2.6. We've dropped the subarchs that don't work with 2.6 yet. -- Stephen R. Marenka If life's not fun, you're not doing it right! <stephen@marenka.net>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature