Lars Roland wrote on 16/04/2005 16:30: > I do however have a question related to this: Should I make the > package dependent on a kernel-image such as: > > kernel-image-2.6-386
Doing so doesn't help. Even if kernel-image-2.6-386 is installed, it doesn't prove that kernel to be running. If your software depends on a 2.6 kernel to be running, state so in the description/documentation. If the software generates a proper error message when run under a 2.4 (or even older) kernel, you are done. If it doesn't, you should probably write a wrapper script which checks the version of the running kernel and exits with a proper error code and error message when not run under a 2.6 kernel. Depending on a specific kernel-image simply doesn't work. At least it doesn't do what you think it does. I for one regularly switch back and forth between various kernels, most are 2.6 kernels, but there are also one or two 2.4 kernels. So even though I have kernel-image-2.6 (which is a virtual package) installed, I don't necessarily use it all the time. > Another possibility would just be to drop any dependency of a specific > kernel image. As I demonstrated above, that is the proper way to go. Don't forget that some people use their own, manually compiled kernels. cu, sven -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
