On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 02:21:18PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > On Wed, Aug 22, 2007 at 02:11:48AM -0700, Steve Langasek wrote: > > I object; if and when there ever is a new upstream kernel branch that we > > want to track separately this would have to be reverted,
> No. We never had complete support for more than one branch. And I really > doubt that anyone wants the sarge-maintenance-problem back. No, I'm sure we don't want it; but if upstream ever changes its mind later about 2.6 being the one true kernel, we might still have it. > > and in the meantime > > it would cause more confusion and work because of the need to shuffle the > > transition packages for users to get a smooth upgrade from etch. > The linux-image packages are already in etch. But they weren't *used* as the metapackages that users installed. We still need linux-image-2.6-foo packages in lenny for upgrade, if nothing else. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.debian.org/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]