On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 03:59:10PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote: > On Wed, Jun 30, 2004 at 07:45:25AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > Yeah, but what about 2.6 for powerpc and x86 (and maybe some other who > > is ready) and 2.4 for the rest of it (and 2.2 for some m68k subarches). > > > > I believe now is the time to take that decision, it may even be too late > > already, given the sarge release schedule, and provided the GR doesn't > > finish in some catastrophic result for the sarge release. > > Well, AIUI, d-i should be able to on a per-arch basis default to a 2.6 > kernel. So we can have sarge release with a 2.6 kernel by default on > selected architectures. -boot may correct me.
Well, the important thing is not so much -boot, but compatbility with the rest of userland, as well as upgrrades from woody with a 2.2 or 2.4 kernel to sarge with a 2.6 kernel. For example, i know that the XF86Config-4 file needs to be changed when using a ps2 mouse, since it was /dev/psaux previously, and is /dev/input/mice now. Breaking X during the upgrade is hardly acceptable if we are going to make 2.6 the default. > > (Still a bit pissed at the syntactic GR proponent who slyly passed this > > when nobody was noticing) > > Yes well, what's done is done. Learn from it. Yeah, never let your guard done, even if you are away, and hardly connected, and just got out of a month/year long GR over the non-free issue, even if they claimed it was syntactical changes only. I should have learned from the first tentative of Branden to get the non-free removal clause in on the sly. Friendly, Sven Luther
