Ben Hutchings <b...@decadent.org.uk> writes:
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 09:08:17PM +0100, Marc Haber wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:00:26 +0100, Adam Borowski
>> <kilob...@angband.pl> wrote:
>> >For example: you download the current point release, burn it to a CD
>> >preparing to install a bunch of servers the next day... then suddenly
>> >there's a new stable update and installation mysteriously fails.
>> >
>> >Wouldn't it be better to not delete superseded packages, at least for base?
>>
>> I would second that. A site I work for was severely bitten by the last
>> squeeze point release since the kernel ABI changed and the kernel
>> module udebs (loaded from a rsynced mirror) did not fit the (unsynced)
>> kernel/initrd from the PXE server any more, resulting in newly
>> deployed servers not even finding their disks.
>
> I can't imagine why you would expect this to work.
The old kernel/initrd has the old kernel version so it would try to
download the udebs for the old version instead of the latest ones. Since
the packages are named differently they can coexist on the archive just
fine.
If the old udebs aren't deleted that should just work.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/878vndbh0m.fsf@frosties.localnet
