Ubuntu kernel labeling scheme confuses the hell out of me.

[Luis R. Rodriguez]

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 8:15 PM, Tim Gardner <tim.gardner at canonical.com> wrote:
> Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
>> On Sat, Feb 21, 2009 at 7:38 AM, Tim Gardner <tim.gardner at canonical.com> wrote:
>>> Eric Appleman wrote:
>>>> Why isn't 2.6.28-8 labeled as 2.6.28.6-8?
>>>>
>>>> - Eric
>>>>
>>> Because our version numbers encode the number of times the ABI has
>>> changed since the release tree was created, and _not_ the stable update
>>> release number (which in and of itself might cause an ABI change).
>>>
>>> https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelMaintenance#ABI
>>
>> Which is unfortunate and hopefully can change? :)
>>
>>   Luis
>>

BTW sorry for the late response, it seems my filter throws things into
a gmail filter regardsless if I'm on the To: list.... I'll have to
monitor this list more carefully.

> It makes no sense to me to encode the stable update version in the
> package version because there are often other unrelated bug fixes
> bundled into the upload.

I don't think I follow, like what?

> What about those times when a kernel package is
> uploaded without any stable upstream updates?

Not sure I follow either.

> IMHO, the version system
> we have is serving its purpose.

The issue I face is having to map Ubuntu kernel foo version to
upstream kernel version bar. There is a fix for this on Jaunty on
/proc/kernelversion but it still seems rather cumbersome to request a
user to provide that as part of their output for a bug report.

  Luis