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

Re: Including a low-latency kernel images in Debian for use with CDD DeMuDi.

On Sun, Feb 12, 2006 at 04:10:21PM +0100, Free Ekanayaka wrote:
> |--==> Junichi Uekawa writes:
>   >>
>   >>Ah, ok, so this would be the same situation as the xen or vserver patches,
>   >>which we already have subarchitectures (maybe not very well named).
>   >>
>   >>I would counsel you to get a svn checkout of the linux-2.6 package, and
>   >>investigate into what Bastian did for vserver, and do something similar.
>   >>
>   >>I can add you to the alioth project if you want to commit stuff, altough i
>   >>think that maybe the exp branch (targeted as 2.6.16) would be best placed to
>   >>do this kind of work.
>   JU> Thanks for the guidance.
>   JU> This is part of 'merge DeMuDi back to Debian' project; I'll be squashing other parts first.
>   JU> We haven't even got lowlatency patches into Debian yet.
>   JU> Free, (or anyone else doing DeMuDi kernel) would you like to see how
>   JU> we could integrate into official kernel-image building tree ?
> I few weeks  ago I've checked out  the source of the linux-2.6 package
> (BTW, nice work!) from the SVN  repository, and adding more flavors is
> just a  matter  of modifying the  debian/arch configuration  files. It
> should not be difficult at all.
> I'm just   wondering  if we  should include   these low-latency kernel
> packages in the current linux-2.6  source package,  or rather clone  a
> new one in some  smart way. If  other Custom Debian Distributions need
> their own kernels, including  everything in one single source  package
> could turn to be a not very scalable approach.

As said, you should build not a new flavour, but a new subarch, in a way
similar of the work bastian blank did with the vserver patches. I am not sure
this infrastructure is fully functional, but it is the way these things should
be handled.

Oh, and it would be very nice if we didn't get spam back from the agnula
mailing list handler or whatever, saying we are not subscribed and such, or
maybe we should drop the agnula mailing list, as it seems clear they don't
really want to speak with us :/


Sven Luther

Reply to: