On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 01:31:30PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 09:40:37AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote: > > On Thu, May 11, 2006 at 05:00:03PM -0600, dann frazier wrote: > > > I don't know what Bastian was intending; but the scenario I mentioned > > > was to: > > > 1) Upload linux-2.6.16 to sid w/o metapackages > > > 2) Let linux-2.6.16 migrate to sid > > 3) Upload linux-latest-2.6 via t-p-u > > > > > Either way, yes. We should remove linux-2.6 from testing once > > > linux-2.6.16 enters. > > > > Bastian > > I am not sure i like this, this means we separate the metapackages out of the > common package again. Is this a good thing ? We made the inverse step earlier.
Yes, I'd rather see us keep the metapackages bundled in linux-2.6.16. The fewer packages that have to be updated for a security update, the better. Of course, I do see the benefit to Bastian's suggestion - we'd have working metapackages for both sid & etch that pull in the latest available in that dist. My proposal leaves sid meta packages pointing at the latest kernel for etch. At minimum I want to make sure linux-latest-2.6 is a single source packages - not per-arch. Building all of these packages for sarge abi-changing updates sucks. -- dann frazier -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]