On Wed, Mar 16, 2005 at 04:54:24PM -0500, seth vidal wrote:
> It doesn't use kernel-devel (since no such thing exists for
FC <= 3),
> but a similar approach embedded into ATrpms' build system allowing to
> access kernel source configured and prepared for the targetted kernel.
or you could just read ville's post about this to fedora-maintainers or
-extras iirc.
Well, Ville wanted to subscribe me to fedora-maintainers two weeks
ago, but obviously this was not possible.
W/o knowing the contents of his post, the situation is that there are
working mechanisms in the field giving a semi-defacto standard. If
there is no reason to reinvent the wheel, adopting it would be the
cleanest and easiest solution.
BTW there is a bad list inflation at fedora that clutters topics
across them. You mentioned two others, fedora-devel could be as well a
candidate (after all we are discussing right now on this), as well as
fedora-packaging. I understand why the lists are being created, but
probably having that many lists is hurting more than it serves. Just
my 2¢.
--
Axel.Thimm at
ATrpms.net