> diff -urN origs/linux-3.10.11/debian/changelog build/linux-3.10.11/debian/changelog > --- origs/linux-3.10.11/debian/changelog 2013-09-10 14:13:17.000000000 +0100 > +++ build/linux-3.10.11/debian/changelog 2013-10-11 04:05:57.380980848 +0100 > @@ -1,3 +1,9 @@ > +linux (3.10.11-1~arm64) UNRELEASED; urgency=low > + > + * Add arm64 packaging > + > + -- <wookey@debian.org> Sat, 05 Oct 2013 02:24:25 +0100 > + > linux (3.10.11-1) unstable; urgency=low > > * New upstream stable update: This should be targetted at 3.11 (trunk in svn). > diff -urN origs/linux-3.10.11/debian/config/arm64/config build/linux-3.10.11/debian/config/arm64/config > --- origs/linux-3.10.11/debian/config/arm64/config 1970-01-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100 > +++ build/linux-3.10.11/debian/config/arm64/config 2013-10-09 16:56:22.585330811 +0100 > @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ > +## > +## File arch/arm64/Kconfig > +## > +CONFIG_ARCH_VEXPRESS=y > +CONFIG_CMDLINE="console=ttyAMA0" I don't think it is appropriate to include a command line in a Debian kernel configuration. > +## > +## File drivers/block/Kconfig > +## > +CONFIG_BLK_DEV_RAM=y Why? > +## > +## File mm/Kconfig > +## > +CONFIG_HUGETLB_PAGE=y ...is not a configurable symbol (or defined in mm/Kconfig). > +## > +## File drivers/mmc/Kconfig > +## > +CONFIG_MMC=y > + > +## > +## File drivers/regulator/Kconfig > +## > +CONFIG_REGULATOR_VEXPRESS=y > + > +## > +## File block/partitions/Kconfig > +## > +CONFIG_EFI_PARTITION=y ...is already set that way in debian/config/config. > +## > +## File fs/nfs/Kconfig > +## > +CONFIG_ROOT_NFS=y Pointless when you have an initramfs, so disable it. > diff -urN origs/linux-3.10.11/debian/config/arm64/config.vexpress build/linux-3.10.11/debian/config/arm64/config.vexpress > --- origs/linux-3.10.11/debian/config/arm64/config.vexpress 1970-01-01 01:00:00.000000000 +0100 > +++ build/linux-3.10.11/debian/config/arm64/config.vexpress 2013-10-08 03:12:22.195734618 +0100 > @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ > +# > +# All arm64 flavours are intended to use the same kernel config. > +# So nothing in here yet [...] Then why is the flavour called 'vexpress'? I would suggest just 'arm64'. Also, you seem to have forgotten to include your changes to debian/rules.real. Ben. -- Ben Hutchings Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it. - Donald Knuth
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part