Re: powerpc kernel-patch 2.6.6-5 in incoming since over a month !!!
On Fri, Jun 18, 2004 at 10:28:50PM +0200, Jens Schmalzing wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Sven Luther writes:
>
> > > The existing mkvmlinuz can do this if you put the line
> > > /boot/vmlinuz-$release in /etc/mkvmlinuz/output .
>
> > Well, it doesn't cost much by setting it by hand,
>
> Yes.
>
> > unless we want to set /etc/mkvmlinuz/output to it by default.
>
> There are packages that contain /boot/vmlinuz-$release, the risk of
> clobbering that by accident with a default setting is too high for my
> taste.
Well, only 2.4.25 packages, which is why we should make a test for non
2.4 kernels or something such. 2.4 kernels don't have the the necessary
mkvmlinuz magic to make it work anyway.
> > > mkvmlinuz works for both non-initrd and 2.4 kernels.
> >
> > Yeah, but what would happen if i tried to install a
> > kernel-image-2.4.25-powerpc-chrp package ? There would be no vmlinux
> > for it, and thus the problem.
>
> What exactly is the problem here? Installing 2.4 and 2.6 side by side?
Well, these contain a vmlinuz, but no vmlinux, so mkvmlinuz, as called
by the post inst would fail, and also the problem you mentioned above.
> > Ok. I would still like to have kernel-image... depend on mkvmlinuz
> > though.
>
> On many systems it's perfectly reasonable to install a kernel-image
> package without mkvmlinuz. So a dependency is too strong, a
> suggestion should be sufficient IMHO.
And how please do you want to make sure someone with a pegasos machine,
not knowing about a mkvmlinuz, will be able to boot its machine when he
thought he had installed the kernel-image package ? That would be a RC
bug, making the system unusable and all.
> > > Sounds good. If Policy doesn't allow 3), the postinst could still
> > > check the file and present a warning.
> >
> > Why should it not ?
>
> Policy is not clear to me there, I need time to understand it.
>
> > You are asking the user if he would like to have it added, a bit
> > like passwd or whatever asking about changing the groups and
> > such.
>
> Actually, changing of /etc/passwd by base-passwd is explicitly allowed
> in the Policy and that's one of the things that puzzles me. Why do
> they bother to allow that one case?
>
> > If this is not allowed by Policy, then the policy is buggy.
>
> In the past, when I thought there was a bug in Policy it eventually
> turned out to be in my brain. Always.
>
> > I hope to have this in the alioth svn repo soon though, and we can
> > then start moving the powerpc package there also.
>
> Can you please give me a very brief tutorial for checking things in
> and out?
Sure, but once the repository is there. The difficult thing is the first
checkout, after you just do update and ci kind of stuff.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: