Re: Vanished kernel. (Solved)

["Roy 'Mooie' Sandgren" <mooie+debian-user@fukt.bth.se>]

Hi again.

The problem with the vanished kernel is now (at least for me) solved. :-)


Wim De Smet wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 22:10:51 +0100, Roy 'Mooie' Sandgren
> <mooie+debian-user@fukt.bth.se> wrote:
> > Indeed. The image (or source, since I want to get the kernel-tree
> > package) does not exist in a later version than 2.4.19. But it has. I
> > use the same sources.list now as I have used for the past year or two.
> > Which contains the stable main and non-us branches from
> > ftp.se.debian.org, ftp.sunet.se and ftp.us.debian.org. As well as the
> > security.debian.org one. No backports.org nor any other source is used.
> > So, apparently, the package that was stable has been removed. Why, is
> > still my question. Was is added by mistake? I have no idea, since that
> > information is not to be found anywhere.
>
>
> I was wondering about this a while ago myself. I checked at
> snapshot.debian.net and indeed there used to be newer versions
> available. I suggest you send a mail to 
> debian-kernel@lists.debian.org asking why, and report back to us. ;-)
> Don't forget to ask them to cc you if you're not subscribing to the
> list. You might be able to find something by just searching for
> messages about it but I haven't found any just yet.

I did subscribe to  debian-kernel@.. and asked there. The first reply 
pin-pointed my problem, I indeed had a small error in my sources-list. 
Not an error as such, but I am apparently also getting 
'woody-proposed-updates', which apparently had (at least) 
kernel-tree-2.4.24 et al for some time. I have no idea why it's not 
approved of as stable, since a later kernel certainly would be useful in 
Woody. But I guess that's about religion and other principles of which I 
can't do much about.


With best regards,

Roy 'Mooie' Sandgren.