Re: How can I make a kernel package that is _identical_ to those available for download?
Paul E Condon wrote:
On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 12:17:44PM +1000, R G Cottrell wrote:
Hi folks,
I asked this on debian-kernel about 8 hours ago but didn't
get any replies.
I've tried about half a dozen times over the last year to compile
a working kernel for my old 233MHz machine. I thought I might
have had a defective processor (a K6) but I've changed it to a
genuine Intel Pentium and still had no success. I can
successfully install one of the precompiled kernel images,
but compiling one on my box has failed so far. At one point I
filed a bug report but Herbert Xu was unable/unwilling to help.
I am currently running RC1 of sarge with a 2.4.27 kernel that I
downloaded as a kernel image, but I've previously tried with
3.0r1 with 2.4.18 and other 2.4.x kernels, as well as an early
2.6.x kernel source.
I now have:
kernel-source-2.4.27_2.4.27-6_all.deb (30M)
I thought I knew what to do with this, but my past failures in
compiling kernels on this box make me wary.
I also have
kernel-image-2.4.27_2.4.27-6.tar.gz (95K)
but I can't understand what I'm supposed to do with it.
I've unpacked it but it seems to be for those who already
know how it works - there's no readme or help I can see.
I also have:
kernel-build-2.4.27_2.4.27-6_i386.deb (8K)
but I don't really know what to do with it either.
I do have kernel-package installed.
As far as I can tell, the latest testing kernel image for Pentium is:
kernel-image-2.4.27-1-586tsc_2.4.27-6_i386.deb (11.5M)
What commands do I need to issue in order to generate a .deb that is
_identical_ to that? I assume I have to use make-kpkg, and it probably
depends on the precise version of the compiler.
The Debian way really does work. I suggest that you stick with it.
I'd certainly prefer to be able to do it the Debian way.
You use make-kpkg as your main tool. Making a kernel package that is
_identical_ to the precompiled package that you have already
downloaded is unwise. You need, at least, to change the
version/rev.number or something so that your computer can distinguish
between the two (and so that you can distinguish between the two in
order to tell whether or not you have succeeded)
Well, I was planning to rename the original, downloaded kernel-image, after
verifying that it would boot my machine. It should. I'm currently running
on the -2 suffixed kernel, so the -6 should work too, I hope.
The instructions for
setting up this change are in man page (I think). Choose an ID string
that includes something personal, such as you initials.
I think I see how to do this, now that I've been directed to:
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/reference/ch-kernel.en.html
Then copy the config file of the prepackaged kernel from /boot into
the source tree under /usr, and follow the steps in the man page.
Makes sense.
Making a near identical copy of a Debian kernel package is a good
training exercise, and good first step. If it fails, you know that
your new kernel is not failing because of a poor choise of kernel
config options, you are using the ones that you know work for your
hardware. After you have succeeded at this exercise, you can start
tweeking the config parms and recompiling.
HTH
The point of making one that is byte-for-byte identical to the downloaded
kernel-image is to check for subtle errors. If I get a kernel-image that is
similar but not identical, it would be difficult to rule out user error if
the thing doesn't in fact boot. If I can create one that is identical,
then
customising it should be a snap.
I've been through the process quite a few times (unsuccessfully) and read
quite a bit, but it never seems to come out right. I have successfully
compiled a kernel or three on a different machine using an old copy
of red hat, and I've been programming in C and other languages on
and off for almost 2 decades, but Debian kernels seem to give me trouble.
Maybe it's just some subtle fault in this old box.
Anyhow, thanks for the advice; we'll see how it goes.
Regards, Rossc.
Reply to: