Dang! I should have RTFM better before sending this.
Contrary to what I wrote below, you don't get to see the epoch in the
_name_ of the produced .deb ( is is in there though. )
On Thu, 23 Oct 1997, Joost Kooij wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Oct 1997 Marcus.Brinkmann@ruhr-uni-bochum.de wrote:
> > Forget it. Get the kernel-package*.deb Install it, and use it (read the
> > doc!) Here is a hint:
> > # make menuconfig
> > # make-kpkg -r custom_1.0 kernel_image
> > # cd ..
> > # dpkg -i <the name of the created debfile>
> > # lilo
> Some corrections; this is from /usr/doc/kernel-package/README.gz:
> For the Brave and the impatient:
> 1% cd <kernel source tree>
> 2% make config # or make menuconfig or make xconfig and configure
> 3% make-kpkg clean
> 4% make-kpkg -r=custom.1.0 kernel_image
> 5% dpkg -i ../kernel-image-X.XXX_1.0_<arch>.deb
> 6% shutdown -r now # If and only if LILO worked or you have a means of
> # booting the new kernel. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED!!
> You should _not_ use a "_" in the revision number! As tempting as it may
> seem, it actually interferes with the policy.
> I don't know for sure if and what it will actually break, but look at the
> name of a custom kernel-image package:
> I think that the _i386 part is discarded. If you use an underscore in the
> revision, then part of it might get discarded.
> So instead, use a dot or a minus.
> Better still even, prepend it with an epoch;
> make-kpkg -r=3:custom-1.0 kernel_image
> I'll try to explain why:
> All packages carry version numbers, so that dpkg may know what version the
> package is. It has an option that lets you tell it to not downgrade a
> package to a lower version. Dselect, for example, uses this option when it
> recurses through a big list of packages.
> Packaged kernel-images in the distribution also have a version number -
> not at all coincidentally coinciding with the kernel version, because it
> is used to reflect the upstream version number. Note that the kernel
> version is also part of the package's name, thus it appears twice in the
> package's file name. It also gets a debian revision number relating to
> differences in builds. It then looks like:
> The reason for telling kernel-package that the package has a version
> is that to dpkg that is always a higher version number than any version
> number starting with a numeral ( eg. "a" > "2" like "b" > "a". ) This way,
> dselect will not try to upgrade your "roll-it-yourself" kernel-image when
> the a new build of the distribution default kernel appears in the archive.
> Now for the epoch: sometimes there is a problem of some kind with the
> version numbering and a newer package actually gets a lower version
> number. In such cases an epoch is prepended to the version number. It
> would look like:
not like so, but
> When this happens, the "custom" version numbering trick suddenly doesn't
> work anymore unless it gets an epoch prepended too. If you make the epoch
> three then you are very probably on the safe side.
> So that's the reason to use something like:
> make-kpkg -r=3:custom-1 kernel_image
> And the next time when you build a kernel, because you just bought a new
> soundcard or you discovered that you suddenly want masquerading in your
> kernel enabled, you'll type:
> make-kpkg -r=3:custom-2 kernel_image
> When make-kpkg is finished, you'll find your
> kernel-image-2.0.29_custom.1.0_i386.deb in /usr/src and all it takes now
> is to install the package:
> dpkg -i kernel-image-2.0.29_custom.1.0_i386.deb
> This will install the kernel, the modules, the map file and do some other
> administrativia and finally it will ask you if you want to make a
> bootfloppy and if you want to run lilo now.
> Good luck,
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
email@example.com . Trouble?
e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .
- Re: Sound
- From: Joost Kooij <email@example.com>