*- On 28 Sep, Fraser Campbell wrote about "Kernel upgrades = security upgrades" > I am curious as to how the kernel upgrades in Debian are done. Recently I > set up a new slink system. The kernel installed was 2.0.34 (older boot > disk). I added "deb http://security.debian.org/ stable updates" to > /etc/apt/sources.list. > > An "apt-get update; apt-get upgrade" grabbed several packages 4 or 5 > packages from the various sites and upgraded them. The kernel was not > upgraded. > > My question is, should kernel upgrades not be part of the normal updates? > I know that there were there security problems fixed between 2.0.34 and > 2.0.36. In light of this shouldn't "apt-get update; apt-get upgrade" > replace the kernel? I realize that "apt-get install kernel-image-2.0.36" ^^^^^^ Notice that the version is part of the package name. Thus a kernel-image-2.0.34 and kernel-image-2.0.36 are two totally different packages as far as Debian is concerned, except that they both provide the virtual package kernel-image and that fact is not determined until it is being installed.
> does the trick but to my way of thinking it should be an automatic upgrade > just like all other security issues ... > So, since they are essentially different packages they will not upgrade each other. > Also, I believe additional security problems were fixed between 2.0.36 and > 2.0.38 but no kernels newer than 2.0.36 (at least in the 2.0 tree) are > available in slink. > Good point. > Please don't take this as critism, it is a question. I just don't > understand why the kernel upgrades aren't automated like all other software > updates. > HTH, -- Brian --------------------------------------------------------------------- Mechanical Engineering [EMAIL PROTECTED] Purdue University http://www.ecn.purdue.edu/~servis ---------------------------------------------------------------------