/me will bring a sample patch set to sprint for this. ** Description changed:
- We need to sort out naming for linux-tools as it is not sensible in the - face of multiple source packages. + The linux tools packages are not currently scalable to multiple source + package branches. This is because the packages are actually per + architecture (not flavour) in both contents and naming but may differ + between source packages which may be at different versions. This prevents + us safely emitting linux-tools packages from branches other than master. + + We have a policy of insulating people from the source package from which a + kernel comes. We do this via the linux-<thing>-<flavour> package naming, + which is consistant regardless of overall package. It therefore makes + a lot of sense to extend this to the tools package. Such that we would + have the following user consumable packages as below: + + linux-tools-<flavour> -- tools to match linux-image-<flavour> + linux-tools-<abi>-<flavour> -- tools to match linux-image-<abi>-<flavour> + + In order to allow linux-tools to be still be a valid install target the + first of these would additionally Provides: linux-tools to allow simple + selection of the appropriate flavour specific package where there is only + one, or to help the user make an informed choice where there is more. + + The first would be the logical choice when wanting to maintain tools + installed for all future version of the kernel, mirroring the kernels as + installed by the linux-<flavour> and linux-image-<flavour> packages and + keeping the user up to date in tools. The second would be the appropriate + package to request installation when trying to target a specific + kernel version and would be used by the wrapper when requesting manual + intervention such as when the linux-tools-<flavour> is not installed. + + The first of these would be added to the appropriate meta package, the + second would come out of the flavour specific packages in the main kernel + source package. + + Further we would then be able to name the actual binary packages as produced by the + various source packages to be source package specific. Thus we would have packages as + below: + + linux-tools-<abi> -- coming out of the master branch + linux-grouper-tools-<abi> -- coming out of the grouper branch + + These would be hidden from the user via the previously listed meta packages + and would not be direct installation candidates. + + There is also an additional linux-tools-common package which represents + the manual pages and the wrappers. These would be only generated and + installed from the master branch and all of the other flavours would + (at least initially) share this package. + + The actual binaries will be moved over to names similar to below: + + /usr/lib/<srcpkg>-tools-<abi>/<binary> + + with symlinks in as below for each flavour pointing to the above: + + /usr/lib/linux-tools/<binary>-<abi>-<flavour> -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1205284 Title: linux-tools naming is not scalable to multiple source packages To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/1205284/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
