On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 13:28:51 -0400 (EDT), Panayiotis Karabassis wrote: > > Thanks! This seems to cover me. > > Not much of a terminology, haha, I just had to put the numbers in there > because there are three version substrings in the .deb file of a kernel > package! To the confusion adds the fact that the version of the source > package (now starts with 2.6 even for 3.0+ kernels), the version in the > name of the package and the debian package version are often different!
Yes, I've noticed that. Ever since moving off of 2.6.xx kernels, we've got naming convention issues. I've been meaning to ask the kernel team about this. I guess it's time to do it. I will post my question to the debian-kernel mailing list and see what happens. At the time I wrote my kernel-building web page, the kernel version in the package name always matched the internal kernel version, and the package version always did too. There were different suffices, but the basic version (x.y.z, for example, 2.6.32), was always consistent. This is no longer the case. As further clarification, make-kpkg uses the internal version in it's package name, and the value specified for --append-to-version will be appended to this internal version. The internal version is specified in the title of the main menu displayed by "make menuconfig". I may need to update my kernel-building web page to add further clarification on this matter, but I'd like to get some clarification from the kernel team first on how they're doing things. (I.e. is this a bug or a feature?) -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1413005936.175488.1332887621568.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
