Andres Salomon wrote: > Hi, > > I'm going to suggest renaming our 2.6.12 source package from > linux-kernel-2.6.12 to linux-kernel-2.6. Thoughts? Dann Frazier and I > have discussed this on IRC a little bit, and come up w/ the following > points.. > > * Source: linux-kernel-2.6, Version: 2.6.12-1 > * As long as each arch is in synch, there are no GPL issues with older > binary packages being in the archive w/out the source. > * Nicer for bugs; http://packages.qa.debian.org/l/linux-kernel-2.6.html > gets us all bugs for 2.6.12+ kernels, versus having to look at > linux-kernel-2.6.12.html, linux-kernel-2.6.13.html, etc. > * Older kernels get removed; no need to ask for manual removal of > linux-kernel-2.6.12 after 2.6.13 becomes available for all archs. > However, we lose the ability to have multiple 2.6's in a release, > which sounds like a win to me; we shouldn't be doing multiple 2.6 > releases anymore anyways, the security team has made it clear they > don't want to support multiple kernels, and it would be extra pressure > for all archs to keep up.
This makes it unlikely to ever get working mips/mipsel kernels in the single source package. Thiemo -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
