On Friday, March 21, 2014, 8:06:41 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Al Dunsmuir
<al.dunsmuir(a)sympatico.ca> wrote:
> On Wednesday, March 19, 2014, 2:09:15 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting(a)splat.cc> wrote:
>>> Josh Boyer (jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org) said:
>>>> > 2) A per-arch filter list, because the existing one that works on
>>>> > x86_64 leaves modules in kernel-core on ARM that lack their
>>>> > dependencies. Bad.
>>>>
>>>> OK, I sorted this out this week. I believe the only arch left to do is
>>>> s390x and that's only because I forgot about it. Oops.
>>>
>>> Is this even needed on s390 for reasons other than consistency? Similarly
>>> with power, is the idea to have a core kernel for running on an LPAR and
>>> then -drivers for the rest of it?
>
>> Needed? Probably not. At the moment it's not possible to build a
>> normal kernel on one arch and the split on another. If we're going to
>> go off and make changes to anaconda and yum and dnf to cope with this,
>> consistency on what is shipped is probably a good thing.
>
>> That being said, it is flexible in terms of the content of those
>> packages. So ppc64 could do what you suggest. s390x would arguably
>> just shove almost everything in -drivers. In reality, I expect most
>> arches to just install both packages anyway.
>
> If you update the ppc64 kernel package, please also do the same for
> the ppc 32-bit kernel.
I did. I have to adapt for all architectures we build for, and ppc
is
one of those. You can find it in the scratch build I pointed to
earlier in the thread.
Thank you kindly for supporting our insanity! I'll grab your scratch
build and look closer.
Al