Destabilising the Linux kernel module ABI ----------------------------------------- https://penta.debconf.org/penta/schedule/dc13/event/1017.en.html What stops us from making each stable update generate new binary packages with a new ABI? Can we solve these problems? a. Upgrades that change the package name will use substantially more disk space on /boot and /, as the old packages remain installed indefinitely. APT even blacklists kernel packages from 'autoremove'! - Ubuntu had this problem: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/apt/+bug/4 923876 - Should be fixed in apt 0.9.9.1 - only last installed version and the newest alternate version are now blacklisted b. Out-of-tree modules need to be rebuilt for each new ABI. This makes upgrades harder for people using them, unless they are willing to install the appropriate linux-headers package and the toolchain it depends on, on each production machine. - Does it help if we only bump ABI at point releases, as these are less urgent to install? Maybe not, as there can be an urgent security release immediately after. - Could support security updates to x.y and x.y+1 for a while, but keeping two versions of same source package in same suite (both stable and stable-security) at same time is difficult c. Changing package names makes work for the FTP team, release team, and installer team d. 'Suggests' prevents auto-removal and many packages have suggests: linux-image - Is there really a point in such suggestions??