On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 05:30:22PM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 02:19:03PM +0000, Dave Whiteley wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 01:34:19PM +0000, Keith O'Connell wrote:
> > >
> > > > I see that the boot floppies use a kernel 2.2.20.
> > > >
> > > > There is not a stable package for kernel 2.2.20!
> > >
> > > ?
> > >
> > > Yes there is! There is no 2.4.20 though.
> > <snip>
> >
> > Are you sure! It is a bit tricky for me to know, as I run my apt
> > source including the testing distribution, and then I do see 2.2.20,
> > however when I look at the stable package lists on debian.org, 2.2.20
> > is missing.
>
> Are we talking about 2.4.20 or 2.2.20? 2.2.20 is, AFAIK, still the
> default kernel on the boot floppies, and is also available as a
> kernel-source and kernel-image package in woody. 2.4.20 is not, and
> probably never will be available in woody, since it was not released
> until well after woody froze. Woody does contain both 2.4.18 boot
> floppies and kernel-{image,source} packages though.
>
> --
> Rob Weir <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://ertius.org/
I am talking about 2.2.20.
I was trying to do something with the stable boot-disks, and when I
looked to see what version kernel they used I found 2.2.20.
I then looked at the Debian Packages web site under the stable
distribution, and the source package for 2.2.20 was not listed.
This is no real problem to me as 2.2.20 is available under testing (or
sid?), so my question REALLY was,
"Is the fact that 2.2.20 is missing from the stable package list a
bug?"
Does this make things clear?
Dave
--
Dave Whiteley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone +44 (0)113 343 2059
School of Electronic and Electrical Engineering
The University of Leeds. Leeds, LS2 9JT, UK
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
