Re: 2.2.8 release?
karlheg@bittersweet.inetarena.com (Karl M. Hegbloom) writes:
> >>>>> "David" == David Huggins-Daines <dhuggins@linuxcare.com> writes:
> David> I have a couple of minor things to fix for Alpha (i386-isms introduced
> David> by the merge of the karlheg_br_markv_whatever branch, some
>
> What did I break, just out of curiosity?
The dbootstrap Makefile had some problems, which cost me lots of time
since it led to root.bin being unnecessarily rebuilt every time I ran
"make" in the toplevel directory. Also your 'unmount' target was
broken (only one $ on a shell variable - the scourge of Makefile
writing :), as was the dbootstrap/po Makefile. And the libfdisk
Makefile's dependency checking was slightly broken (it made rules of
the form 'testing: testing.c' instead of '.depend/testing: testing.c')
The .translation/ stuff in the dbootstrap makefile is pretty nice
though, much better than the old '.tmp.foo.c' cruft. Good work (even
if I think your Makefiles are somewhat needlessly complex :)
There was only one i386-ism I spotted actually - the message about
LILO and the 1024 cylinder limit. There is no LILO on any other
architecture nor is there a 1024-cylinder limit (in fact, CHS disk
geometry in general, which we all know is fake anyway these days, is
irrelevant to machines without DOS-brain-damaged firmware)
<gripe>
Actually it looks like that message may have already been
there, just only in the "verbose" mode. For the record, this whole
verbose/non-verbose flag thing is pretty confusing, I don't want
dbootstrap to hide anything from me or have to specify special
undocumented (please don't say they're documented in the syslinux boot
screen - this is only on i386) boot parameters to get it to do what I
want. But maybe I didn't follow the rationale behind it. IMHO
dbootstrap fails to be sufficiently self-documenting and this is one
of the reasons people have trouble installing Debian.
</gripe>
Cheers
--
David Huggins-Daines, Senior Linux Consultant, Linuxcare, Inc.
613.562.1239 tel
dhuggins@linuxcare.com, http://www.linuxcare.com/
Linuxcare. Support for the revolution.
Reply to: