Re: make-kpkg funny
I see that some has filed bug #33793 on this. Beat to the punch again!
Bob
On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Bob Nielsen wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:58:24 -0700 (MST), Bob Nielsen wrote:
> >
> > >I just compiled 2.2.2 using make-kpkg (kernel-package 6.07) and using the
> > >command 'make-kpkg --revision=custom.1.0 kernel_image' it created a file
> > >
> > >kernel-image-.._custom.1.0_i386.deb
> > >
> > >Where does make-kpkg get the kernel version? Makefile shows:
> > >
> > >VERSION = 2
> > >PATCHLEVEL = 2
> > >SUBLEVEL = 2
> > >EXTRAVERSION =
> > >
> > >I'm a bit afraid to install, as I get a message that it wants to put the
> > >modules in /lib/modules/..
> > >
> > >Any ideas as to what went wrong here?
> >
> > NOTHING went wrong.
> >
> > It was YOU yourself who told make-kpkg to use the Debian(!) version no.
> > "custom.1.0". The part after "kernel-image-" in the filename should
> > contain the Linux kernel version no.
>
> But that's the way I've always used make-kpkg, per the documentation. It
> is supposed to add the kernel version to the name of the created package.
>
> When I compiled 2.2.1 in this manner, the created debian package was
>
> kernel-image-2.2.1_custom.1.0_i386.deb
>
> >
> > And what's wrong about /lib/modules? This is the place where the modules
> > belong, after all. :-)
>
> Yes, but it should be in /lib/modules/2.2.2, not lib/modules/..
>
> I noticed that kernel-package in potato was upgraded (?) a few days ago.
> I wonder if the new version has a problem with parsing the kernel version.
>
> Bob
>
> ----
> Bob Nielsen Internet: nielsen@primenet.com
> Tucson, AZ AMPRnet: w6swe@w6swe.ampr.org
> DM42nh http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen
>
>
----
Bob Nielsen Internet: nielsen@primenet.com
Tucson, AZ AMPRnet: w6swe@w6swe.ampr.org
DM42nh http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen
Reply to: