[Frugalware-devel] new rule proposal

Krisztian VASAS iron at ironiq.hu
Sat Mar 3 08:01:24 CET 2012



On Fri, 2 Mar 2012 22:36:30 -0800 (PST), James Buren wrote:
> I would think that "minor version bumps" would be permissible. My
> thoughts are mainly that all major changes
> in the main branch should be in by pre2. By pre2, 2/3 of the release
> cycle will have elapsed. Why is allocating
> the remaining 1/3 to resolving issues a bad idea? The other idea was
> to set it after rc1, which leaves only 1/6
> of the release cycle for resolving issues.

I agree with this...

> As for not having a kernel backup when we upgrade the kernel, the
> problem with that is, how can you discern
> the proper version of the old kernel in the initrd package? Unless we
> can backup the initrd properly as well, any
> kernel backup is useless.

What about versioning the initrd: initrd.img-3.2.1-1fw2? You don't need 
to symlink anything, just parsing the grub config. Other distros solved 
this, check them how...

-- 
UNIX/Linux System Administrator
Member of Frugalware Developer Team


More information about the Frugalware-devel mailing list