Lucid meta in pre-proposed
stefan.bader at canonical.com
Fri Oct 1 07:46:34 UTC 2010
On 10/01/2010 09:33 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 09:42:42PM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
>> Is there a reason why we can't have a Lucid meta package in
>> pre-proposed? Otherwise its difficult to track ABI jumps in the
>> Lucid pre-proposed kernel. If we can't have 2 packages of the same
>> name in 2 release pockets, then we'll likely have to have a separate
>> pre-proposed PPA for each release.
> Normally there should be one if we handle linux-meta correctly, but
> someone needs to add the ABI bump into meta branch UNRELEASED. I
> suspect we could handle it automatically with some work.
I must take the blame of pointing it out to people that there *should* be a meta
package for things but not following up with them on doing it or make someone do.
More information about the kernel-team