Re: make-kpkg funny
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
Reply to: