Re: Missing m68k builds for the point release

["Christian T. Steigies" <cts@debian.org>]

Hey Geert,
On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 08:48:01AM +0100, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote:
> 
> As we just got 2.6.24-rc7, I expect 2.6.25 near the end of March.

I am having some trouble keeping m68k up-to-date in the debian svn, is this
always the list of the latest patches?
http://linux-m68k-cvs.ubb.ca/~geert/linux-m68k-patches-2.6/
and when a new releaese is ready, you put it into something like this:
http://linux-m68k-cvs.ubb.ca/~geert/linux-m68k-patches-2.6.23
?

I noticed that some of the patches have changed (just little bits, but
enough to make the patch fail), so I am thinking of copying your structure
in the debian svn, ie having a new directory for every version. Then
adding/updating patches could be done almost automatically.

But I discovered another problem in the build, which was not there
previously. After the kernel and modules have been built, some files from
the build tree are being removed:

rm $(PACKAGE_DIR)/lib/modules/$(REAL_VERSION)/{build,source,modules.*}

I had to change it to this for m68k to succeed:

rm $(PACKAGE_DIR)/lib/modules/$(REAL_VERSION)-m68k/{build,source,modules.*}

REAL_VERSION = $(UPSTREAMVERSION)$(ABINAME)$(LOCALVERSION)

But it seems this is not the correct solution:
 On Sat, Jan 05, 2008 at 09:44:02PM +0000, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
 > adjust path for {build,source,modules.*} for m68k only
 
 This is a workaround for some generic problem. The kernel thinks it have
 a different EXTRAVERSION than the package. Please revert and fix the
 real problem.
 
 Bastian

There is a clue hidden here for what the real problem is, maybe you can
solve the puzzle?

Christian