Patchwork Move kernels to "Section: kernel"

login
register
mail settings
Submitter Colin Watson
Date March 15, 2012, 1:31 p.m.
Message ID <20120315133129.GY3407@riva.dynamic.greenend.org.uk>
Download mbox | patch
Permalink /patch/146953/
State New
Headers show

Comments

Colin Watson - March 15, 2012, 1:31 p.m.
Per https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/499557, kernels should be in
"Section: kernel" these days.  We'll override this in the archive, but
it would make life easier if the kernel packaging matched as well.

(It does no harm for this to be applied to earlier releases as well,
though it doesn't have to be, so whatever's easiest for you.)


Thanks,
Tim Gardner - March 15, 2012, 1:40 p.m.
Applied to Precise.

Would applying this patch to older releases prevent the problem where 
new kernels end up in universe ?

rtg
Colin Watson - March 15, 2012, 2:02 p.m.
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 07:40:58AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
> Applied to Precise.

Thanks.

> Would applying this patch to older releases prevent the problem
> where new kernels end up in universe ?

No, it makes no difference either way to that.  That's basically some
combination of archive admin carelessness and Launchpad infelicities.
Colin Watson - March 15, 2012, 3:27 p.m.
On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 02:02:06PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 07:40:58AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
> > Applied to Precise.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > Would applying this patch to older releases prevent the problem
> > where new kernels end up in universe ?
> 
> No, it makes no difference either way to that.  That's basically some
> combination of archive admin carelessness and Launchpad infelicities.

That said, can this be applied to other flavours as well (esp. ARM) or
will that happen automatically?

Thanks,
Tim Gardner - March 15, 2012, 4:17 p.m.
On 03/15/2012 09:27 AM, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 02:02:06PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote:
>> On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 07:40:58AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
>>> Applied to Precise.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>>> Would applying this patch to older releases prevent the problem
>>> where new kernels end up in universe ?
>>
>> No, it makes no difference either way to that.  That's basically some
>> combination of archive admin carelessness and Launchpad infelicities.
>
> That said, can this be applied to other flavours as well (esp. ARM) or
> will that happen automatically?
>
> Thanks,
>

I'll apply it to ti-omap4 as well.

rtg

Patch

diff --git a/debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub b/debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub
index f6184a4..c137d39 100644
--- a/debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub
+++ b/debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ 
 
 Package: linux-image-PKGVER-ABINUM-FLAVOUR
 Architecture: ARCH
-Section: admin
+Section: kernel
 Priority: optional
 Pre-Depends: dpkg (>= 1.10.24)
 Provides: linux-image, linux-image-3.0, fuse-module, =PROVIDES=
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@  Description: Linux kernel image for version PKGVER on DESC
 
 Package: linux-image-extra-PKGVER-ABINUM-FLAVOUR
 Architecture: ARCH
-Section: admin
+Section: kernel
 Priority: optional
 Depends: ${misc:Depends}, ${shlibs:Depends}, linux-image-PKGVER-ABINUM-FLAVOUR
 Description: Linux kernel image for version PKGVER on DESC
diff --git a/debian.master/control.stub.in b/debian.master/control.stub.in
index d2136aa..a448376 100644
--- a/debian.master/control.stub.in
+++ b/debian.master/control.stub.in
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@  Description: Linux kernel specific documentation for version PKGVER
 
 Package: SRCPKGNAME-tools-common
 Architecture: all
-Section: admin
+Section: kernel
 Priority: optional
 Depends: ${misc:Depends}
 Replaces: SRCPKGNAME-tools (<= 2.6.32-16.25)