On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 05:17:12PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sat, 2010-09-18 at 17:57 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 04:38:36PM +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2010-09-16 at 23:16 -0700, Steve Langasek wrote:
> > > > s390-tools, lilo, and elilo are the only bootloaders for which Breaks:
> > > > were
> > > > added in the recent upload. However, there are reports[1],[2] of
> > > > serious
> > > > upgrade failures resulting from not upgrading grub before trying to
> > > > upgrade
> > > > the kernel; and the grub in lenny definitely does not comply with the
> > > > new
> > > > kernel hooks policy (/etc/kernel/postinst.d/zz-update-grub only exists
> > > > in
> > > > the squeeze versions). Is this an oversight, or is there some other
> > > > explanation for why grub was being left in an inconsistent state for
> > > > these
> > > > users?
> > > Official kernel packages have never invoked GRUB except by running hook
> > > commands.
> > Still they are incompatible. This is what breaks is for.
> GRUB would always 'break' when a new kernel package was installed if the
> user or installer didn't set the hook command. There has been no
> incompatible change.
grub uses a public interface. There is no need for depends in this case.
However if the public interface is changed, it needs to be handled
accordingly.
> > Also the other architectures are missing.
> No other architectures have an historical default boot loader that used
> to be run automatically.
Well, a not so quick grep shows that the old k-p happily also called the
following bootloaders: colo, palo, sibyl, vmelilo.
Bastian
--
It is more rational to sacrifice one life than six.
-- Spock, "The Galileo Seven", stardate 2822.3
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-rc-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
