[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: etch and kernels2.4

On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 02:39:17PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 02:22:37PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 02:13:50PM +0200, Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org> wrote:
> > >   that's the point of my question. The 2.6 kernel in etch do not depends
> > > upon a 2.5 libc. the ones in unstable do. So in order to upgrade the
> > > libc to upstable one, you _have_ to install an etch 2.6.18 first.
> > > 
> > >   I'm asking what we can do to ensure people don't get to the point
> > > where they don't know how to break that chicken and egg issue like in
> > > #428655.
> > > 
> > >   IMHO we should have some kind of warning in etch ASAP, but I'd be glad
> > > to have the opinions of the RMs and SRMs on this.
> > 
> > IANASRM, but IMHO, it would be too late to do this in a point release.
> > Why not a preinst script in libc 2.5 to disallow upgrade if the running
> > kernel is 2.4, as well as adding conflicts on etch libc to kernel packages ?
>   ooookay, let's rephrase it again, and please read the bug I
> mentionned. THe libc _already_ does those check and the chicken and egg
> problem you guessed does exists, in lenny/sid. *BUT* it can be avoided
> if the user had a 2.6 kernel from etch before.

Just explaining the problem better so that people can skip reading the
bug report:

  The chicken and egg problem is that a sid 2.6 kernel depends upon the
glibc 2.5 (soon to be 2.6), and the latter will refuse to install is a
2.6 kernel isn't there first. So to break this look you have to install
the etch 2.6 kernel that does not depends upon a libc requiring a live
2.6 kernel to be there.

>   This is an issue that will bit hard for the lenny upgrades, as nothing
> in etch _forces_ the users, neither warn them (except the release notes,
> but I feel it's not really enough) that continuing to work with a 2.4
> kernel is stupid.
>   The problem I'm mentioning is an etch -> lenny upgrade path issue.

·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

Attachment: pgpjMV4Chcuub.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: