On 09/28/09 04:04, Ben Hutchings wrote:
The separation between linux-2.6 and linux-latest-2.6 allows for a later
kernel version to be added to a suite without replacing the previous
one, as with 2.6.24 added in etch-and-1/2. Neither of these options can
achieve that.
I understand how this
(Jumping into the conversation because I've been bitten by this
too.)
- don't put too much version information into the name of the
real kernel package, and use the debian version number
instead
No, the binary package names must change for every ABI change, just as
for shared
On Sat, 2009-09-26 at 16:06 +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
Package: linux-latest-2.6
Version: 2.6.30+20
Severity: wishlist
linux-image-amd64 and linux-image-2.6-amd64 seem to be pretty
fragile. Every other day their dependency to the real kernel
package is broken, because the kernel has been
Package: linux-latest-2.6
Version: 2.6.30+20
Severity: wishlist
linux-image-amd64 and linux-image-2.6-amd64 seem to be pretty
fragile. Every other day their dependency to the real kernel
package is broken, because the kernel has been updated and
linux-latest-2.6 is not in sync.
Do you think it
4 matches
Mail list logo
