Re: Bug#703209: linux: Please Add multiplatform flavour to armhf
On Tue, 2013-03-19 at 16:13 +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 17, 2013 at 9:23 AM, Ben Hutchings wrote:
>
> > I would much prefer a name that will provide a more useful distinction
> > in future (and not be too long!). Perhaps it should refer to the CPU
> > requirement like the flavours for some other architectures.
>
> How about the same scheme as on other arches?
>
> linux-image-`uname -r`-armel
I think the question here is what the `uname -r` bit should be.
Specifically the $FLAVOUR in 3.x.y-z-$FLAVOUR.
I think there is an argument for making the multiplatform case be the
default "no-flavour flavour" i.e. $FLAVOUR is armhf/arm64 etc. Or maybe
that's what you are suggesting having not realised that `uname -r`
currently includes the -$FLAVOUR suffix. Hrm, I think we may actually be
talking about the same thing ;-)
> linux-image-`uname -r`-armhf
> linux-image-`uname -r`-arm64
>
> Or maybe the CPU is better:
>
> linux-image-`uname -r`-armv4
> linux-image-`uname -r`-armv7
> linux-image-`uname -r`-armv8
>
> --
> bye,
> pabs
>
> http://wiki.debian.org/PaulWise
>
>
Reply to: