Re: 2.6.4 kernel

[Jens Schmalzing <j.s@lmu.de>]

Hi,

Sven Luther writes:

> Why shouldn't they ? Mmm, i see why, they install into : 
> 
>   /usr/src/kernel-patches/powerpc/debian-powerpc.diff.gz
> 
> Do you think kernel-package would be ready to have it moved to :
> 
>   /usr/src/kernel-patches/powerpc/2.4.25/debian-powerpc.diff.gz

Of course.  The location of the patch is entirely up to the apply and
unapply scripts, which you should generate with dh_installkpatches
from the dh-kpatches package anyway.  Take a look at kernel-patch-xfs
or the late kernel-patch-benh, both by Yours truly.

> Somehow i doubt it.

> Why do you need to have them both installed ? because of the mol
> modules you want to build ?

Yep.  I didn't really mind dropping support for 2.4.24 when 2.4.25
came out.  I would hate to drop support for 2.4.25 when 2.6.4 comes
out, though, and building is a lot easier if I can have both patches
installed simultaneously.

> I still think it would be nicer to build the mol modules directly from
> the powerpc kernel package, but i understand why you prefer it the other
> way around.

You can have the mol-modules package when you pry it from my cold dead
fingers.

I *do* hope you come up with the correct answer to the above phrase.

That said, the reason for keeping the pre-built mol modules in a
source package separate from both the remainder of mol and the kernels
is simple.  The modules have to be rebuilt both when mol changes and
when the kernels change.  Both changes happened several times since we
last talked about this.

Regards, Jens.

-- 
J'qbpbe, le m'en fquz pe j'qbpbe!
Le veux aimeb et mqubib panz je pézqbpbe je djuz tqtaj!