Re: Fixing the lm-sensors/i2c mess
Marc Wilson <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Mon, Jan 05, 2004 at 02:32:27PM -0500, David Z Maze wrote:
>> Maybe the best actual solution is to repackage lm-sensors 2.6.5,
>> patched to work around the constants-in-newlines problem; then we
>> could straightforwardly go back to having prebuilt kernel modules, and
>> while we'd have to rebuild dependent packages against libsensors1, at
>> least the world won't end the way it does now.
> Speaking as someone who uses lm-sensors, and not as a d-d, how about
> 2.7.0 instead of 2.6.5? i2c 2.7.0 and lm-sensors 2.7.0 are the last
> to apply semi-sanely to a relatively mainline 2.4.x kernel.
lm-sensors 2.7.0 built sanely against i2c 2.6.x, right, so it works
with a stock 2.4.x kernel. That particular version of lm-sensors has
the issue that the userspace library's ABI changed but the library
soname didn't (hence the libsensors-1debian1 package that existed for
a bit and plagued testing KDE users); I don't know whether it's the
same library as libsensors2 or not.
> lm-sensors 2.7.0 doesn't build with gcc 3.x, of course. Since I use gcc
> 2.95 for all kernel-related things, it's not been an issue for *me*, but
> you don't want to have to do that in Sarge.
But the fixes for that are fairly straightforward, at least. (It'd be
an FTBFS bug for sarge if there were prebuilt kernel modules.)
David Maze email@example.com http://people.debian.org/~dmaze/
"Theoretical politics is interesting. Politicking should be illegal."
-- Abra Mitchell