Re: powerpc kernel-patch 2.6.6-5 in incoming since over a month !!!
On Sat, Jun 19, 2004 at 11:21:56AM +0200, Jens Schmalzing wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sven Luther writes:
>
> > Please tell me what you gain by not having a depends there ? what
> > is the benefit in _NOT_ installing it ?
>
> No cruft on the many systems where it is not needed at all.
Oh, come on, mkvmlinuz has an installed size of 28k, and if the variable
is not set in the /etc/kernel-img.conf file, it has no adverse effect at
all. Please tell me exactly in how far you feel that this would be so
much of a hindrance compared to the benefit of having kernel-image
installation work out of the box on non-pmac subarches ? And justify the
pain it is to each users that need it compared to that small benefit.
If you would have told me that the real problem is that mkvmlinuz pulls
in binutils, which is 6.6Mo or something such, then that would be a real
argument, and something that could be discussed, but just saying no from
the start, well, is not proper behavior for a debian powerpc kernel
maintainer. Or else, you should be satisfied by 'but it works on i386'
kind of responses when faced with arch-related FTBFS.
> > If you are really going to insist in doing it this way, i would
> > insist that we create at least a package containing a special
> > non-modular pegasos friendly config, in chrp friendly format.
>
> Again, we have reached a point where further discussion is fruitless.
Well, you where not discussing in the first place, just asserting your
point of view without even giving the opposite view any consideration,
not adding any justification.
> The question whether mkvmlinuz is Depends or Recommends or Suggests is
> secondary. First, it has to be integrated properly into the
> kernel-image postinst, the postinst_hook is only a temporary solution
> after all. Since Manoj wrote that postinst and you have the hardware
> to test it, the two of you should sort this out. If you come up with
> a patch that Manoj doesn't want to merge, send it to me and I'll put
> it into the official kernel-image packages.
Well, you were the one proposing to use the postinst_hook, where you not ?
I will see what i can do about this, altough i hate dabbling in perl
code, but the postinst_hook was a nice solution.
Going to fix this then over working on dpatchified kernel-source-2.6.7
though.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: