Re: kde 4.3.4 is building for unstable now ;-)

[jedd <jedd@progsoc.org>]

On Sunday 13 December 2009 20:18:39 Valerio Passini wrote:
> Ok Jedd, do everything your own way, but let me underscore that you are 
> quite often complaining about the way KDE doesn't work for you and 
> reporting numerous malfunctions in your system that none else is 
> experiencing. Maybe that following your own way is causing some 
> troubles? If I was you, I would consider this possibility.
> I hope you understand that mine is just a fair critics. Bye

 Hey Valerio ... I feel I might be about to 'protest too much' :)

 I accept that many of my posts are a bit complainy in nature,
 but I dispute that (m)any of them could be tracked back to a
 self-compiled kernel or self-compiled nvidia driver.

 I accept that some people think that one or two of the bugs
 I've asked about on here are related to the nvidia driver per se,
 specifically the delay while resizing one application (konsole).

 I've pointed out already that my earlier message in this thread,
 regarding snow on the screen, turned out to be due to the mix
 of 4.2.4 and 4.2.2 packages.  It was posted more as a warning
 to others to delay updating their unstable box for a few hours.

 I should probably have been more explicit about that, I suppose,
 but I appreciate when others post such recommendations, as it can
 save you a whole heap of pain.

 Looking at the output of make-kpkg, specifically the kernel image
 and the nvidia drivers - they (as you'd expect) come out to be
 binary-identical files, no matter what packaging method you use.

 (This makes sense because for the kernel, I'm using the Debian
 kernel source packages, and for the nvidia driver, we'll we're all
 using the same file from the nvidia site.)

 That is, native nvidia installer, or Debian wrapper around same - 
 will both produce identical kernel and xorg modules.  As I say, this
 is exactly what you'd expect.  Similarly, a 'make bzImage && make
 modules && make modules_install' will produce an identical set of
 binaries in /boot and /lib/modules as using make-kpkg and then doing
 a dpkg --install on the resultant .deb would.  Again, as you'd
 expect.  If there *were* any differences, then I'd be very worried.

 I doubt you're suggest that there's some kind of weird homeopathic
 'memory of the command line that made it' influencing factor such
 that a kernel knows whether it was made with make bzImage or
 via make-kpkg.  If it does know this, *and* behaves differently, then
 that's very bad news for all the RH, CentOS, Suse (etc) users.  :)

 J.