[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Preparing 2.6.15-rc7 for experimental



On Mon, Jan 02, 2006 at 10:20:15PM +0100, Christian T. Steigies wrote:
> Moin,
> On Fri, Dec 30, 2005 at 09:49:50AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 11:28:59PM +0100, Frederik Schueler wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > I would like to get on with the preparations of 2.6.15-rc7 and 
> > > schedule an upload to experimental for tomorrow evening UTC.
> 
> m68k is unable to keep up with that schedule, partly because I went on
> vacation, and partly because my upstream is still at 2.6.14 and I am not

I know, and the idea is to have all other arches ready, and then have m68k
come in in -2 or something, same as we did with 2.6.14, which i believe was
fine with you.

> going to duplicate the work that is going to happen eventually in linux-m68k
> CVS, if somebody else wants to do that, fine with me. I tried to hack up
> something quick, but I am either getting a diff that does not apply, or a
> huge diff, that does not compile. This will have to wait until our CVS is at
> 2.6.15, which usually never happens before the new version is released.

I know, which is why we make allowance for m68k :)

> Even when that is done, I need to work on the config. The last version I
> tried on my Amiga (2.6.12) did not quite boot, since it did not load the
> SCSI drivers, it did detect the IDE devices though. I assume both SCSI and
> IDE drivers are built as modules and live in the initrd? Maybe this is only
> a minor problem on m68k then.

Ah, working on the configs is important indeed, but you need t owork with
yaird & initramfs-tools also.


This is important, because we want to 

> > Oh, and yes, this means the kernel now build-depend on ocaml-interp
> 
> Oh, was this really necessary? 32MB wasted for ocaml and friends. Does ocaml

This is only ocaml-interp, which depends on ocaml-base-nox, and that's it, it
will represent at worst around 1MB only, and ...

> even work on m68k? I only remember having lots of problems with it...

... if i remember your problem well, they would not have happened in this
case, as they affected the full blown ocaml packages, and they should be fixed
anyway.

If it was necessary, well, it never is, but i am going to implement over time
a full blown split-config that actually works as it should, and i prefer to do
it in a language i master well, and which makes it easy to do this (handle
easily list and trees, ocaml is the best suited for that).

Friendly,

Sven Luther



Reply to: