[Users] Installation of latest Kernel fails again (deb size mismatch)

[Kir Kolyshkin]

On 03/07/2014 06:21 PM, spameden wrote:
> Btw, Kir, there is no version anymore in uname -a.
>
> Could you fix this at least to display current version, e.g. instead of:
>
> # uname -r
> 2.6.32-openvz-amd64
>
> display:
> # uname -r
> 2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64

Again, it is the same as in stock Debian kernel. While their version is 
3.2.54-2,
uname shows 3.2.0-4.

>
> and also consider reverting to the old system if you can..


Yeah, I guess I should do it, just waiting for someone who knows Debian
more than me to chime in.
>
>
>
> 2014-03-07 18:45 GMT+04:00 Narcis Garcia <informatica at actiu.net 
> <mailto:informatica at actiu.net>>:
>
>     I think that is a good strategy to have a main package to be manually
>     installed:
>     linux-image-openvz-amd64
>     linux-image-openvz-686
>
>     But fully versioned as its dependencies (042stab084.26)
>     And with a dependency to a version-named package, such as:
>     linux-image-2.6.32-42.84.26-openvz-amd64
>
>     In this way, upgrading the main package this will install the new
>     versions of dependencies. I think that this is the way Debian
>     works, and
>     this allows to have old and new files installed simultaneously.
>
>     To have the old and new kernels allow to test new one before removing
>     old one.
>
>
>     El 07/03/14 02:28, Kir Kolyshkin ha escrit:
>     > On 03/02/2014 02:01 PM, spameden wrote:
>     >>
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> 2014-03-03 0:38 GMT+04:00 Ola Lundqvist <ola at inguza.com
>     <mailto:ola at inguza.com>
>     >> <mailto:ola at inguza.com <mailto:ola at inguza.com>>>:
>     >>
>     >>     Hi
>     >>
>     >>     Problem fixed now.
>     >>     I had fixed the problem temporarily, but I had forgotten to
>     >>     upgrade to the debarchiver version with the fix so it will not
>     >>     happen again. Now I have done the upgrade and fixed the problem
>     >>     properly.
>     >>
>     >>
>     >> I think it's not fixed properly:
>     >>
>     >> 1) wrong version of linux-image:
>     >> # dpkg -l|grep linux-image-openvz
>     >> ii  linux-image-openvz-amd64
>     >> 042+1                         amd64        OpenVZ Linux kernel
>     >> (meta-package)
>     >>
>     >> 2) # ls /boot |grep openvz
>     >> config-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64
>     >> *config-2.6.32-openvz-amd64*
>     >> initrd.img-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64
>     >> *initrd.img-2.6.32-openvz-amd64*
>     >> System.map-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64
>     >> *System.map-2.6.32-openvz-amd64*
>     >> vmlinuz-2.6.32-openvz-042stab084.17-amd64
>     >> *vmlinuz-2.6.32-openvz-amd64*
>     >>
>     >> so now we are missing usual version here in the package.. that's
>     >> actually very bad ... can you look into it?
>     >>
>     >> many thanks.
>     >
>     > This is intentional, and I changed it after looking into how default
>     > Debian kernel is packaged/versioned.
>     >
>     > If you take a look, they have [meta]package linux-image-amd64
>     which requires
>     > package linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64. The latter (currently) has a
>     version of
>     > 3.2.54-2 and this version is changed (incremented) with every
>     release, while
>     > package name stays the same (linux-image-3.2.0-4-amd64). Also,
>     vzkernel
>     > name stays the same -- it is /boot/vmlinuz-3.2.0-4-amd64 in
>     different
>     > versions.
>     > I am using the very same approach now for OpenVZ kernels.
>     >
>     > Previously I was adding the VZ version (i.e. 042stab0xy.z) into
>     kernel
>     > package name,
>     > and it was added to vmlinuz and the /lib/modules directory name
>     as well.
>     > The problem
>     > is, you need to specify a different dependency in
>     > linux-image-openvz-amd64 metapackage,
>     > and apt-get upgrade complains that it can't upgrade the system
>     since a
>     > new version
>     > of an installed package (linux-image-amd64) requires a package
>     that is
>     > not installed yet.
>     > The problem could be fixed by running dist-upgrade, but eventually I
>     > decided that
>     > this message is a hint that I package openvz kernels improperly,
>     that
>     > lead me to
>     > looking into a way standard Debian kernels are packaged and
>     implementing it
>     > the same way for OpenVZ kernels.
>     >
>     > I am not a Debian guru and am very open to suggestions on how to
>     improve
>     > this.
>     > Perhaps we can return to the older versioning scheme and ask
>     people to
>     > use dist-upgrade.
>     > Or maybe I am totally missing something. Please help.
>     >
>     > Kir.
>     >
>     >
>     >
>     > _______________________________________________
>     > Users mailing list
>     > Users at openvz.org <mailto:Users at openvz.org>
>     > https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>     >
>     _______________________________________________
>     Users mailing list
>     Users at openvz.org <mailto:Users at openvz.org>
>     https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Users mailing list
> Users at openvz.org
> https://lists.openvz.org/mailman/listinfo/users

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openvz.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20140307/2842b352/attachment-0001.html>