Re: Grub vs. linux-image-2.6.32 conundrum

[Stephen Powell <zlinuxman@wowway.com>]

On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:24:12 -0400 (EDT), Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 31 2010, Stephen Powell wrote:
>> As best as I can tell, kernel-package was at one time used by the
>> Debian kernel team to create official Debian stock kernel image
>> packages.  But at some point in the past there was a parting of the
>> ways, and the Debian kernel team started using other tools to create
>> official Debian stock kernel image packages.
>
> Arguably, at this point, they should have also stopped using
> /etc/kernel-img.conf (perhaps still parsing it as a fallbacK), and
> started using and documenting a _new_ file.  If that had been done,
> with the postinst only reading /etc/kernel=img.conf when the new config
> file was not present, would have allowed for a graceful transition to
> the new, differently documented, configuration file.

I agree completely.  Unfortunately, that was not done; and so we find
ourselves in the middle of muddle today.  But it's not too late.
The kernel team could start doing that.  And I believe that they should,
especially since there are now substantial differences between the supported
options in the config file for stock kernel image packages and kernel image
packages created by kernel-package.  You were using it first; so they
should be the ones to change.

(For those of you who do not recognize the name, this poster, Manoj
Srivastava, is the author and Debian package maintainer for the
kernel-package package, and is therefore the world's foremost authority
on this subject.)  Thanks for contributing, Manoj!

-- 
  .''`.     Stephen Powell    <zlinuxman@wowway.com>
 : :'  :
 `. `'`
   `-