Re: Observation re third parties supporting Debian kernels
On Sun, Sep 25, 2005 at 08:16:51AM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2005 at 03:58:31PM +1000, Andrew Pollock wrote:
> > > > He did mention that they'd looked into supporting Debian, but slammed the
> > > > lid back down on it after they had discovered (and I'm paraphrasing)
> > > > "multiple kernels with the same version number".
> > >
> > > Seems like uninformed non-sense, but then maybe due to the previous messy
> > > situation. I think these guys are lying when speakign about linux support
> > > anyway, and only mean linux/x86 anyway.
> >
> > Possibly (uninformed). I didn't go into details with the guy. I don't even
> > know what version of Debian they'd looked at, and yes, Linux/x86 is
> > absolutely correct. These guys are coming from the world where there were
> > only commercial Unices, so in that case, there'd be one commercial Unix per
> > CPU architecture, so the model of distributing binaries would work. I'm not
> > suggesting that it's a good model...
>
> Indeed.
>
> > > We provide the linux-headers apckage to make it as easy to build external
> > > modules against those kernels as possible, so it should be no real problem.
> >
> > As I said to the guy from CA, they're probably best doing something like
> > what nVidia do with their binary video driver - compile a shim against the
> > installed kernel's headers, and have their binary crap talk to that, but I
> > don't know enough about their product...
>
> Nope, we have the infrastructure, so they can easily enough produce real
> debian packages for all debian supported flavours. The idea is to :
>
> for a given set of architectures (probably i386 and amd64 for them, but
> maybe they could do powerpc and ia64 too), build-depends on the
> linux-headers-<version> package, which will :
Mmm, this one is not active on 2.6.12 kernels, at least not in -8, we need to
fix that.
Friendly,
Sven Luther
Reply to: