Questions about LTS backports to Hardy

Steve Langasek steve.langasek at canonical.com
Thu Jun 25 13:08:04 UTC 2009


On Thu, Jun 25, 2009 at 06:29:43AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
> Steve Langasek wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:41:02PM +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> >> I wondered about having a meta package which was linux-jaunty which gave
> >> you the jaunty kernel on hardy.

> > I was thinking this would look better than putting the upstream version
> > number in the metapackage names, but have no real objections either way.

> I'm of the opinion that Jaunty means more to those of us that lived
> through it, and therefore has less meaning to those outside our cloister.

> A kernel version number is deterministic in the continuum of version
> numbers, and will likely have more meaning to the non-Ubuntu initiate.
> Outside of the development community, all of our public communications
> _do_ use deterministic version numbers to refer to our releases instead
> of adjectives.

Hmm, but the convention of using the release codename for metapackages has
precedent; cf. "linux-backports-modules-intrepid-generic".

Actually, in that respect I guess it's probably better to not use the
codenames, because one would be used to mean "backport from $release" and
the other is "backport to $release".

-- 
Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek at ubuntu.com                                     vorlon at debian.org




More information about the kernel-team mailing list