Re: volatile backport
On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 03:04:30PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 02:35:00PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> > * Sven Luther wrote:
> > > On Mon, Sep 26, 2005 at 01:55:51PM +0200, Norbert Tretkowski wrote:
> > > > * Andres Salomon wrote:
> > > > > I'm working on a backport of linux-2.6 for volatile; the goal is
> > > > > to not have it require any further backports.
> > > >
> > > > Just for info, I already prepared a backport of linux-2.6 for
> > > > backports.org, but I used a backported kernel-package for the
> > > > build.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.backports.org/pending/linux-2.6/
> > >
> > > Is this the same backported kernel-package that i provide? Or your
> > > own stuff?
> >
> > It's a separate backport of kernel-package.
> >
> > > What do you do for udev and futur yaird/initramfs ?
> >
> > There's also a udev backport. And I need to add a yaird/initramfs
>
> Can i ask you why you didn't use my own backports announced here a couple of
> weeks ago ? And reused by Simon Horman for his x86 stuff ?
>
> > backport when I add add the backport of 2.6.13.
>
> Cool.
>
> > > How does backports.org work? Is it autobuilt? If yes we could use
> > > that and forget about volatile for now.
> >
> > Not yet, but Joerg Jaspert is working on the setup currently.
>
> That would be great indeed.
>
> i wonder how we could get the powerpc64 flavour built in these condition, as
> it needs a powerpc biarch toolchain that is not present in sarge. Using the
> sid one is not such a problem, as this is a kernel package which is just
> built, and not linked with glibc.
Just for the record, Sven, Norbert and I discussed this on IRC.
The main reason that Norbert didn't use the backport that Sven
and I worked on was because he wasn't aware of it. It seems
we might have slightly different goals, Sven and I are after a minimal
backport that can slide into Sarge with as few changes as possible,
wheras Norbert wants a full backport that presents everything
new and wonderful. None the less, there seems to be significant
scope for colaboration in future.
--
Horms
Reply to: