On Thu, 2017-04-13 at 09:15 +, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Ben Hutchings:
> > [...]
> > >
> > > I am probably missing something here, but wouldn't it be possible to go
> > > back to the original -dbg (as a "worst case" option) and defer these
> > > changes to buster? Not saying I like it, I just w
Ben Hutchings:
> [...]
>>
>> I am probably missing something here, but wouldn't it be possible to go
>> back to the original -dbg (as a "worst case" option) and defer these
>> changes to buster? Not saying I like it, I just want to know whether I
>> missed something.
>
> We could do, but do you t
On Wed, 2017-04-12 at 07:50 +, Niels Thykier wrote:
> Ben Hutchings:
> > When implementing signed kernel packages, I wanted to make the signed
> > image packages (built from linux-signed) take un-suffixed names so that
> > existing procedures to install specific kernel versions would pick the
>
Ben Hutchings:
> When implementing signed kernel packages, I wanted to make the signed
> image packages (built from linux-signed) take un-suffixed names so that
> existing procedures to install specific kernel versions would pick the
> signed packages, and users would be discouraged from installing
When implementing signed kernel packages, I wanted to make the signed
image packages (built from linux-signed) take un-suffixed names so that
existing procedures to install specific kernel versions would pick the
signed packages, and users would be discouraged from installing
unsigned packages.
Th
5 matches
Mail list logo
