On Thu, Jan 22, 2004 at 10:06:07AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:46:54PM -0600, Steve Langasek wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 10:30:06PM +0100, Jeremie Koenig wrote: > > > On Wed, Jan 21, 2004 at 03:25:55PM -0500, Joey Hess wrote: > > > > Joey Hess wrote: > > > > > > +elif [ -d modules/$flavour ]; then > > > > > > + modlistdir=modules/$flavour > > > > > > > > > > Looks like this would also allow the i386 xfs kernel to look like this > > > > > in kernel-versions: > > > > > i386 2.4.22 xfs ... > > > > > And use the modules/i386-xfs directory. Steve? > > > > Er, no it won't. I suppose the flavor could be 386-xfs though. > > > Well, with i386 as the arch and xfs as the falvour, it'll use > > > modules/i386-xfs, it's the line just above my own addition. > > The issue I've been having is getting the uname output of the > > kernel-image packages to match what we need to see, so that package > > names can be autodetected by the installer *and* we can simplify the use > > of flavor names. > > Just needs a bit of attention, I'm sure. > Why not use archdetect for this ? How in the world would that integrate with archdetect? It has nothing at all to do with the architecture we're on, and everything to do with the flavor of kernel that was booted -- which is exposed through uname, which is already handled through kernel-installer. -- Steve Langasek postmodern programmer
Attachment:
pgpq4J0Edj9da.pgp
Description: PGP signature