Bug#219582: marked as done (ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel)
Your message dated Sat, 8 Nov 2003 18:00:57 +0100
with message-id <20031108170057.GA809@zombie.inka.de>
and subject line Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel
has caused the attached Bug report to be marked as done.
This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.
(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what I am
talking about this indicates a serious mail system misconfiguration
somewhere. Please contact me immediately.)
Debian bug tracking system administrator
(administrator, Debian Bugs database)
--------------------------------------
Received: (at submit) by bugs.debian.org; 7 Nov 2003 13:37:55 +0000
>From rmh@khazad.dyndns.org Fri Nov 07 07:37:52 2003
Return-path: <rmh@khazad.dyndns.org>
Received: from 86.red-80-24-13.pooles.rima-tde.net (aragorn) [80.24.13.86]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AI6o5-0001zg-00; Fri, 07 Nov 2003 07:37:50 -0600
Received: from rmh by aragorn with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian))
id 1AI6nz-0000M6-00; Fri, 07 Nov 2003 14:37:39 +0100
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Robert Millan <rmh@debian.org>
To: Debian Bug Tracking System <submit@bugs.debian.org>
Subject: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel
X-Mailer: reportbug 2.36
Date: Fri, 07 Nov 2003 14:37:35 +0100
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Message-Id: <[🔎] E1AI6nz-0000M6-00@aragorn>
Sender: <rmh@khazad.dyndns.org>
Delivered-To: submit@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-6.0 required=4.0
tests=BAYES_30,HAS_PACKAGE
version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_7 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
* Package name : linux
Version : 2.4.22
Upstream Author : Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com> and others, see:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/CREDITS
* URL : http://www.kernel.org/
* License : GPL
Description : Linux 2.4 kernel
Linux 2.4 kernel re-packaged as a standard Debian package. For details, see:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg00204.html
Package sources available in:
http://people.debian.org/~rmh/linux/
-- System Information:
Debian Release: testing/unstable
Architecture: i386
Kernel: Linux aragorn 2.4.22 #1 dt nov 4 17:09:49 CET 2003 i686
Locale: LANG=ca_ES@euro, LC_CTYPE=ca_ES@euro
---------------------------------------
Received: (at 219582-done) by bugs.debian.org; 8 Nov 2003 17:01:14 +0000
>From inet@zombie.inka.de Sat Nov 08 11:01:13 2003
Return-path: <inet@zombie.inka.de>
Received: from quechua.inka.de (mail.inka.de) [193.197.184.2]
by master.debian.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 1 (Debian))
id 1AIWSX-0005mu-00; Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:01:13 -0600
Received: from zombie.inka.de (pd9e4a604.dip.t-dialin.net [217.228.166.4])
by mail.inka.de with asmtp
id 1AIWSV-0002BP-00; Sat, 08 Nov 2003 18:01:12 +0100
Received: from inet by zombie.inka.de with local (Exim 4.24)
id 1AIWSH-0000I0-5x; Sat, 08 Nov 2003 18:00:57 +0100
Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 18:00:57 +0100
From: Eduard Bloch <edi@gmx.de>
To: Robert Millan <zeratul2@wanadoo.es>
Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, 219582-done@bugs.debian.org
Subject: Re: Bug#219582: ITP: linux -- Linux 2.4 kernel
Message-ID: <20031108170057.GA809@zombie.inka.de>
Mail-Followup-To: Robert Millan <zeratul2@wanadoo.es>,
debian-devel@lists.debian.org, 219582-done@bugs.debian.org
References: <[🔎] 20031107145638.GA7813@racsa.co.cr> <[🔎] 20031107162208.GA1848@khazad.dyndns.org> <873cd0yv47.fsf@sanosuke.troilus.org> <[🔎] 20031107191923.GA2474@khazad.dyndns.org> <[🔎] 87y8usx77b.fsf@sanosuke.troilus.org> <[🔎] 20031107205857.GB2988@khazad.dyndns.org> <20031108080836.GA7590@zombie.inka.de> <[🔎] 20031108112927.GA846@khazad.dyndns.org> <20031108155432.GA979@racsa.co.cr> <[🔎] 20031108161517.GH654@khazad.dyndns.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <[🔎] 20031108161517.GH654@khazad.dyndns.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i
Sender: Eduard Bloch <inet@zombie.inka.de>
Delivered-To: 219582-done@bugs.debian.org
X-Spam-Status: No, hits=-3.8 required=4.0
tests=QUOTED_EMAIL_TEXT,QUOTE_TWICE_1
version=2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_7
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.53-bugs.debian.org_2003_11_7 (1.174.2.15-2003-03-30-exp)
#include <hallo.h>
* Robert Millan [Sat, Nov 08 2003, 05:15:17PM]:
> On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 09:54:32AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote:
> > > It's not "cosmetic". The point is it has a completely different
> > > packaging style and philosophy. I want to package the Linux kernel in
> > > the same way the rest of Debian is packaged, that's all.
> >
> > Until now you have failed to provide a reason for that, other than
> > cosmetic reasons.
>
> See:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg00414.html
Everything you mentioned there has been declared as pointless in this
thread. Even the reason "automatical major updates... when 2.6 is
suitable..." is bogus since many users have special reasons to keep the
kernel. And things like libc incompatible with some kernel has to be
dealt with inside of the kernel package. Your "linux" package is in no
better position to handle that issue.
> > Please _define_ your target user base,
>
> Those who like the advantages described in:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg00414.html
Where? Please show me the sentence!
> > sake of it. If someone wants to work on such a thing I won't stop
> > them. If they send patches I'll look at them. But it will take a good
> > deal of talking to convince me that that _per se_ is better.
>
> Read what the current Linux kernel maintainer says:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg00452.html
Defining it as an experiment. Not successor. Experiments may or may be
successfull, even independent of what the previous authority says. Just
in contrary, bf2.4 has been an experiment, was honored by _real_ users
and matured, though Herbert tried to fight it.
> > So, your package _can't_ be the default kernel package, because that
> > needs to be supported on all architectures the installer supports.
> > Which makes me wonder again: what is your target userbase?
>
> Those who like the advantages described in:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg00414.html
Where? As said before, you are NOT going to decrease the number of
kernel-image versions, nor do you try to make them more useful or more
stable. You just create another fork, promising "easy understanding of
the packge for developers" (*) but taking the generic name away.
(*) I cannot remember any of actual kernel-image maintainers with severe
complaints about Herbert's way of packaging.
MfG,
Eduard.
--
Bringen Hufeisen wirklich Glück? Ich bezweifle es - ich habe schon
viele unglückliche Pferde gesehen.
-- Pearl Sydenstricker Buck (Pseudonym: Sedges, John)
Reply to: