Why kernel packaging is so bad in Debian and UbuntuI've written before about Ubuntu's substandard kernel update management; what I didn't say then (partly because I didn't fully understand it) is that this is just a manifestation of a general problem with kernel packaging in Ubuntu (and Debian, which it inherits from). The fundamental problem for packaging kernels on Debian and Ubuntu is
that there are two unfortunate design choices in That you can only install a single version of a package at once means that if you want to have multiple kernels installed at once, they must have different package names, not just be different versions of the same package; hence the Debian and Ubuntu necessity of having the kernel version embedded in the package name. This then creates the temptation to do 'minor' kernel updates without changing the package name, and in turn this creates the situation where such a 'minor' change can introduce a bug but leave you with no easy way to reboot to the old kernel. That packages cannot be multi-arch precludes having kernel packages
with the same name but that are for different sub-architectures, so
Debian and Ubuntu have to put the sub-architecture into the package
name (creating ' (With multi-arch, a generic (One comment.)
|
These are my WanderingThoughts GettingAround This is part of CSpace, and is written by ChrisSiebenmann. * * * Atom feeds are available; see the bottom of most pages. Categories: links, linux, programming, python, snark, solaris, spam, sysadmin, tech, unix, web |