Re: compiling kernel
>>"Joey" == Joey Hess <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Joey> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Because the kernel-source and kernel-package packages are arrch
>> independent, and the bin86 requirement is an intel-ism. Since we do
>> not have a means of specifying architecture specific dependencies,
>> we now pepper the documentation with hints about bin86 0(
Joey> One way around this is to make kernel-package an architecture
Joey> dependant package (in name only), and hack something into
Joey> debian/rules to add the bin86 dependancy for i386.
I am opposed to mangling a package merely to cover the
deficiency of another.
Besides, it shall not help the person who does not use
kernel-package. kernel-package is by no means mandatory (it has
priority optional, so is not installed by default either).
Instead of glossing over this issue, we should investigate the
possibilities of the new dpkg that klee has produced.
In the meanwhile, in any Debian produced kernel source package
or kernel-package package, there should already be directives as to
how to compile the kernel source. I still think people should read
those prior to compiling a kernel. Not having bin86 is only the
smallest of gotchas in a kernel compile.
Slander meets no regard from noble minds; only the base believe what
the base only utter. -- Beller
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com