> Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2007 13:42:23 +0200> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Ben Humpert
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > > kinda curious, uname -a said "Linux dr02g
> 2.6.18-4-686 #1 SMP Wed Feb> > 21 16:06:54 UTC 2007 i686 GNU/Linux". > > This
> is not a SMP kernel, not a real one or something different?!> > ~$ grep SMP
> /boot/config-2.6.18-4-686> CONFIG_SMP=y> # CONFIG_X86_BIGSMP is not set>
> CONFIG_SUSPEND_SMP=y> CONFIG_X86_FIND_SMP_CONFIG=y> CONFIG_X86_SMP=y> > The
> 686 kernels are SMP for some time now.> > > dpkg said, the installed "kernel"
> is "linux-image-2.6.18-4-686" and> > "linux-image-2.6-686" (no kernel-image-*
> is installed)> > The linux kernel packages in etch and above have been
> renamed to avoid> conflicts with non-linux kernels like freebsd.> > HTH,>
> Andrei
For some time? I don't understand. I thought only a SMP kernel is SMP capable,
others arent. Sure, its still "testing" but testing crap is nonsense...
Again i want to switch to a different distribution ... just call the kernel
packages kinda like "debian-kernel-..." so conflicts avoided perfectly ... in
sarge most (not all) of the kernel packages got renamed from kernel-image* to
linux-image*. now they changed names again ... just change all names now to a
name you dont have to change in some month again.
Also it looks like etch has a bug, i installed "kernel-image-2.6-686-smp" and
"linux-image-2.6-686-smp" but i cannot select this real SMP kernel at the grup
loader, jut the both entries created by the debian installer.
The differences aptitude shows between these both kernels are:
linux-image-2.6-686-smp:
- Version: 2.6.18+6
- Depends: linux-image-2.6-686
- Tags: admin::kernel
kernel-image-2.6-686-smp:
- Version: 1:2.6.18+6
- Depends: linux-image-2.6-686-smp
- Tags: admin::kernel, role::metapackage
So, what are the real differences? do they just flood apt with "empty" packages?
Thanks for advice
