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

Bug#658728: linux-image-3.2.0-1-amd64: No more sound

A. Costa wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:

>> A. Costa, could you try the attached patches, against 3.2.y?  It works
>> like this...
> That might be difficult.  I'm on dialup, I've tried to do what you said,
> but at the 'git' point, after an hour of downloading the prompt was
> still at '0%':
>	% git clone -o stable  git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git
>	Cloning into 'linux-stable'...
>	remote: Counting objects: 2450707, done.
>	remote: Compressing objects: 100% (393726/393726), done.
>	^Cceiving objects:   0% (15033/2450707), 5.43 MiB | 12 KiB/s    

Oh, my bad.  "git clone" grabs the entire kernel history, so it has a
high (one-time) cost.

You can find instructions for testing a patch while using the usual
Debian source package here:


The short version is that after extracting the kernel source by
whatever means is convenient to the current directory, one can run

	cp /boot/config-$(uname -r) .config; # current configuration
	make localmodconfig; # optional: minimal configuration
	make deb-pkg; # optionally with -j<num> for parallel build

to get a .deb for the unpatched kernel, and then

	patch -p1 <patch1
	patch -p1 <patch2
	make deb-pkg; # maybe with -j4

to get a .deb for the patched kernel.

The "ketchup" tool, which can download patches instead of full
tarballs from kernel.org to make downloads of successive kernel
releases a little smaller, might be helpful.

> Would you be able to easily produce such a delta, (containing the patch
> you'd like tested, in binary -- no compiling on my end), from the stock
> kernel I'm using?  If not, there's clearly a need for a relatively
> simple tool to do such jobs.

Sorry, no --- I do my development work on a laptop that is not able to
compile the kernel very quickly.

Hope that helps,

Reply to: