Arch Linux

Please read this before reporting a bug:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Bug_reporting_guidelines

Do NOT report bugs when a package is just outdated, or it is in the AUR. Use the 'flag out of date' link on the package page, or the Mailing List.

REPEAT: Do NOT report bugs for outdated packages!
Tasklist

FS#11682 - The kernel26 package should be called kernel without the 26

Attached to Project: Arch Linux
Opened by Bob Fanger (NebyGemini) - Wednesday, 08 October 2008, 12:49 GMT
Last edited by Thomas Bächler (brain0) - Friday, 05 December 2008, 15:31 GMT
Task Type Bug Report
Category Kernel
Status Closed
Assigned To Tobias Powalowski (tpowa)
Aaron Griffin (phrakture)
Thomas Bächler (brain0)
Architecture All
Severity Medium
Priority Normal
Reported Version None
Due in Version Undecided
Due Date Undecided
Percent Complete 100%
Votes 3
Private No

Details

Most packages don't have a version number in the name, because arch just has the most up to date version.
There are exceptions to this rule like the "qt" package, but in the case of qt it is handled correctly.
the "qt" package is the most recent version and qt3 the older version.

It has been a while since kernel24 and to my knowledge a kernel28 isn't coming any time soon.
Therefore i suggest to rename the kernel package to "kernel"

(Sorry if this "bug"report should be placed elsewhere)

PS:
I know that a lot of packages are depending on kernel26, but thats a good reason to do in now instead of later.
This task depends upon

Closed by  Thomas Bächler (brain0)
Friday, 05 December 2008, 15:31 GMT
Reason for closing:  None
Additional comments about closing:  It ain't broke!
Comment by Pierre Schmitz (Pierre) - Wednesday, 08 October 2008, 13:06 GMT
And if you really want to do it right you'll have to rename it to just "linux" anyway. :-)
Comment by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Saturday, 18 October 2008, 15:32 GMT
I don't think there will be 2.8 ever. :) There have been talks about changing version numbering scheme (e.g. to date-based) again in past months.
Comment by Aaron Griffin (phrakture) - Monday, 20 October 2008, 06:12 GMT
Yeah, maybe in the future we should rename it to "linux-kernel" or something similar. But I say we wait until they get through with the versioning "shake up". Greg KH has suggested <year>.<minor>.<micro> for a new versioning scheme. When they switch, how about we switch too?
Comment by Thomas Bächler (brain0) - Monday, 20 October 2008, 07:14 GMT
Actually, the right name would be "linux" as per Archlinux packaging standards. However, I don't want to fix something that isn't broken, as replacing the package will get rid of backup files and will thus lead to inconveniences.
Comment by Roman Kyrylych (Romashka) - Tuesday, 21 October 2008, 12:17 GMT
"as replacing the package will get rid of backup files and will thus lead to inconveniences."
hmm.. sounds like thing that needs to be improved in pacman
Comment by Glenn Matthys (RedShift) - Friday, 05 December 2008, 14:30 GMT
+1 from me. Renaming to linux is a good idea.
Comment by Thomas Bächler (brain0) - Friday, 05 December 2008, 15:31 GMT
I'm not going to change that. IF we ever get to rename the package, it will be called "linux". Big IF!

Loading...