I wondered what was the status of switching d-i to the 2.4.27 and 2.6.8 kernels, so I prepared this table. The four sets of kernel versions are those used by linux-kernel-di to produce udebs, the version set in build/config to use those udebs for the installer boot images, the fallback value set for some arches in rootskel for the kernel-image deb to install, and the kernel versions hardcoded (!) into base-installer for kernel-images to install. One thing I didn't check is the status of kernel-images propigating the testing for the new kernels. The rootskel and base-installer kernel versions need to track that.
arch linux-kernel-di build/config rootskel base-installer
i386 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.27/2.6.8/2.4.26 [1] 2.4.26/2.6.7 [6]
alpha 2.4.27 2.4.26 [2] 2.4.26
amd64 2.6.8 2.6.8
arm 2.4.27 2.4.27
hppa 2.4.25 [3] 2.4.25 [3] 2.4.20 [7] 2.4.26 [10]
ia64 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.25 [8]
m68k 2.2.25/2.4.27 2.2.25/2.4.26 [4]
mips 2.4.27 2.4.27
mipsel 2.4.27 2.4.27
powerpc 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.25/2.6.7
[11]
apus 2.4.25 [5] 2.4.25 [5] 2.4.25
s390 2.4.27 2.4.27 2.4.21 [9]
sparc 2.4.27/2.6.8 2.4.27
[1] i386 speakup build still using old 2.4.26 udebs, new speakup kernel too
big (I plan to fix this today somehow)
[2] alpha build not using new udebs
[3] hppa far out of date
[4] m68k build not using new udebs, or is it? The common-kernels file has
2.4.27, but the other .cfgs mention 2.4.26. Mess..
[5] powerpc/apus still using old kernel
[6] New i386 kernel-image in testing, waiting on 2.6.8 to update i386
installed kernels.
[7] Obviously this is only a fallback, but 2.4.20?!
[8] 2.4.27 is in testing, rootskel needs update
[9] Again, it's only a fallback. But having a fallback is useless and may
be harmful if it's not up-to-date...
[10] Note this is newer than the version used by the installer for hppa.
[11] Note this is older than the version used by the installer for powerpc.
--
see shy jo
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
