On Friday 01 February 2008, dann frazier wrote: > Is there anything special we need to add to deal with etch 1/2 > kernel metapackages? We were talking about using a name like > linux-image-2.6-686-etchnhalf.
As I explained in my mails re etch+1/2 some time back [1] , D-I simply will not install the correct kernel unless either: - the user installs at medium/low priority and selects the correct kernel - the user preseeds the exact kernel version at the boot prompt (the addition of an alias as discussed back then to make that easier has _not_ yet been implemented) [2] - something is changed in base-installer to make it select the updated kernel automatically Having metapackages with whatever name changes nothing in those facts. I have been quite disappointed that there was no real follow-up to my mails, which now leaves us in the situation that there is basically no support yet to select the correct kernel for etch+1/2. If the metapackages will be limited to Etch (i.e. only purpose is to allow easy updates in case of ABI-changing security updates), I have no real objection to naming them etchnhalf, although I think it is a disastrous option for people who may have to type it at the command line. Cheers, FJP [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot/2007/12/msg00234.html + thread [2] Note that adding the preseeding on the CD is _not_ going to work as that does not allow selecting a correct kernel flavor.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
