Re: [Kernel-Discuss] how can we guess a new kernel is available ?

[Guillaume Rousse]

Gustavo De Nardin (spuk) wrote:
> * Replying Adam Williamson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Tue 13 Feb 2007 
> 18:14):
>> On Tue, 2007-02-13 at 17:00 +0000, Vincent Panel wrote:
>>> Yes, but updating the kernel is not only a matter of security
>>> (bugfixing and new devices support too). And even if it were the
>>> case, why would easing this task (updating the kernel) be a bad
>>> thing ?
>> It's not.
>>
>> How to say this in a diplomatic way...the issue is, well, procedural.
>> Everyone who was voiced an opinion agrees that the change should be
>> made. However, those who are responsible for making the change appear
>> to be busy with other things, of whose nature we know nothing since
>> they never communicate.
> 
> FWIW, I mostly disagree with automatic kernel updates, unless, maybe, if 
> they are security-*only* updates. Current Linux kernel development 
> unmodel makes me very wary of changing a working kernel.
> 
> Of course, a -latest kernel scheme, which one can *choose* to use, is 
> ok..
Unless I misunderstood, no one really ask for automatic kernel update
installation and reboot. Rather a way to _compute_ than a new kernel is
available, as for all other package updates. 'You just have to read
security mailing-list' does not answer this need.