[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: eliminating -source packages

adrian.bridgett@iname.com wrote:

> On a related note, I think that the current way of building the
> binary modules packages leaves alot to be desired.  Currently my
> /v/l/d/available lists 8 different images files (and that's just
> i386).  Am I really expected to compile a modules-source package eight
> times?

Ha!  Welcome to my world.  It's what I do all the time.

> An alternative is to get the people who make the kernel-image-*
> packages build the modules.  However this isn't ideal either - are
> they expected to rebuild each time some module maintainer updates a
> package?

Well, there's the rub; isn't it?  That's why I've never really been
upset (other than an occasional rant to blow off steam) that the
kernel-image maintainers do not build extra module packages to accompany
their kernels.  The pcmcia modules that I maintain are released far more
frequently than the kernel-image packages.

> The best approach would be some auto-builder script which would
> rebuild things as needed.  Any takers :-)

I would be glad to help engineer such a thing.  I've developed several
crude schemes over the years to automate part of the procedure for
building all of those pcmcia-modules packages.  (Unfortunately, after
tomorrow, I'll be unavailable for the next two weeks.)

- Brian

Reply to: