Re: Solving the linux-2.6 firmware issue
On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 11:26:12PM +0100, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 06, 2007 at 01:52:24PM -0800, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > That's a big drawback. Please change the *version* of the package instead
> > of changing the source package *name*.
> DOes everything from the ftp/archive management tools to kernel-package
> cope wiuth this? if yes, we can go this way.
> Renaming the source package is known to work, thus we chose that option
> in the first place.
The ftp/archive management tools will cope with it just fine, and the BTS
will definitely handle it much better than a package rename. I would not
expect kernel-package to have any problems (since the final binary package
names remain the same, incl. the -ABI portion of the package name, only the
source version has changed), but if you need me to do some testing of this
for you to confirm it, I'd be happy to do so.
--
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/
Reply to: