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??