On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 07:44:15PM -0400, Chris Kloiber wrote:
On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 01:23:38 +0200, Axel Thimm
<axel.thimm(a)atrpms.net> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 07:20:32AM -0400, Build System wrote:
> > kernel-2.6.7-1.448
> > * Mon Jun 21 2004 Arjan van de Ven <arjanv(a)redhat.com>
> >
> > - make kernel-doc and kernel-sourcecode builds independent of eachother
> > - disable kernel-sourcecode builds entirely, we'll be replacing it with
documentation
> > on how to use the src.rpm instead for building your own kernel.
>
> We just recently had the discussion of how many documented processes
> will get broken with the kernel-source -> kernel-sourcecode
> change. Not having it at all doesn't really improve that. ;)
>
> What's the idea behind this? And what about people building external
> kernel modules? For the reasons outlined in the previous thread on
> this /lib/modules/`uname -r` is not adequate for that. Having the
> kernel-source package change its name is one thing we can adapt
> to (even though it was not necessary). Having it disappear for the
> face of earth is another :(
>
> Please, get it back!
While I'm far from an expert, the headers needed to build 3rd party
modules are now packaged with the kernel proper (that's one reason
it's taking so long to install a new kernel nowadays).
In theory, yes, but try to build a kernel module for i686 on an athlon
box. The kernel sources will clash with the running kernel.
Also it is quite an overshooting to have to install a foreign kernel
for a simple build of a kernel module. Installing/Uninstalling the
kernel will take more time than the kernel module build itself. But
that could be solved by packaging the headers in separate (from the
kernel) packages.
The kernel-sourcecode package is sort of redundant as the actual
source is in the kernel*.src.rpm anyway, but can be built (as i did)
by editing the kernel-2.6.spec and changing the line near the top to
say "build sourcecode=1" instead of 0.
Of course, but if the kernel-source(code) gets considered obsolete and
deprecated this will not stay for long there.
--
Axel.Thimm at
ATrpms.net