Re: On linux kernel packaging issue
On Sat, Nov 08, 2003 at 06:51:50PM +0300, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > They won't. Just like Glibc maintainers don't provide optimised
> > packages I don't see why should I provide them.
> Note that it is no longer true for current sid packages.
> nikita@bliss:~> apt-cache search libc6-i686
> libc6-i686 - GNU C Library: Shared libraries [i686 optimized]
> AFAIK, Debian policy on optimized building is "do it for packages that
> really gain from it". E.g. libssl, libc6, (of course) kernel.
Oh, I see. Then it might be worth providing "linux-i686" in the same way
Glibc provides "libc6-i686".
I'm open for discussion.
> > The same way users get customized packages of anything else in Debian:
> > get the source, add/remove patches, build it.
> The difference is that in most cases there is little reason to rebuild
> package instead of just using debian-provided binaries.
> However, unlike other packages, kernel often really needs local
> customization. That's why make-kpkg exists, I believe.
That's right. But I'm not replacing make-kpkg.
"[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the
thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he
gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work."
-- J.R.R.T, Ainulindale (Silmarillion)