Re: Bug#23143: make-kpkg fails on Alpha
On Fri, Jun 05, 1998 at 01:31:51PM -0400, Christopher C Chimelis wrote:
> On 4 Jun 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > I'll sleep over this overnight; I am not convinced this is
> > a normal level bug. There is nothing I can do about this in the first
> > place; as I can't test it. The alpha developers have not seen it fit
> > to add kernel-package compatibility; I fail to see why it should be a
> > bug against my package.
> This is partially my fault since I just haven't gotten around to hacking
> kernel-package at all. I did notice the fault, but haven't had time to
> correct it (and still don't, otherwise, I'd throw a patch together right
> now for you). I agree with you as far as a "wishlist" since it would
> require knowledge and access to an arch that you don't have.
Well, the alpha developers would love to add kernel-package compatability,
but haven't had time. :-)
I, too, agree that this is wishlist.
> I can also put time into testing whatever changes you make prior to making
> an "official" modification to the package
Ditto.
> FYI, MILO is much different than LILO and would require some user
> intervention at reboot time to enable a new kernel unless it was named the
> same as the old one with the exact same location.
If, by "same location" you mean "location in the filesystem", rather than
"location on the disk" (as lilo does), then that's not true. MILO
understands ext2.
> FYI, Alpha kernels are generated as gzipped files, but are named
> vmlinux.gz for some odd reason. They are located in arch/alpha/boot
> (same as other arch's basically). MILO doesn't care about the file name
> as long as it can find the file itself (it still has problems following
> links, unfortunately).
Actually, I thought MILO wouldn't recognize a gzipped file unless it was
named .gz---hence the name.
> I'll retest symlinks with MILO hopefully this week (I need to resolve that
> issue for myself as well, so I would like to know for sure if improvements
> have been made since last year about this). Either way, links may or may
> not be important when it comes to Alphas since MILO will let you boot
> different images without needing the same filename. I could point you
> towards some MILO docs if you'd like, but be warned that they're sketchy
> at times. Also, without console access to an Alpha, you would never be
> able to see MILO in action to see what I am describing, unfortunately.
The last time I tried it, it failed, which is unfortunate---I like the
system we have on the i386.
Alternately, if MILO could read a config file (it understands ext2, after
all), then that would be an adequate solution.
Maybe the Debian/Alpha team needs to bite the bullet and work on MILO a
little bit. It's not been well maintained. I hear, though, that it's a
prime pain to compile.
Mike.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: