Re: Question about make-kpkg and versions
Thanks! This seems to cover me.
Not much of a terminology, haha, I just had to put the numbers in there
because there are three version substrings in the .deb file of a kernel
package! To the confusion adds the fact that the version of the source
package (now starts with 2.6 even for 3.0+ kernels), the version in the
name of the package and the debian package version are often different!
Regards,
Panayiotis
On 03/27/2012 02:05 PM, Stephen Powell wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2012 06:49:58 -0400 (EDT), Panayiotis Karabassis wrote:
>> I am trying to understand how make-kpkg chooses the versions for the
>> packages it creates. Each package has a name(a), which contains a
>> version part(a1), as well as a version(b), which is further split in
>> upstream version(b1) and Debian revision(b2), right? Assuming this, I'll
>> ask my question in the form of a quiz: :-)
> Hello, Panayiotis. I would start by reviewing "Step 9" in my kernel
> building web page, http://users.wowway.com/~zlinuxman/Kernel.htm.
> It doesn't use the same terminology as you do, but maybe it will help
> explain things. The man page is out of date with respect to the
> default value of --revision, if it is omitted. The default was changed
> recently to conform with current Debian policy, but the man page is
> out of date. I suggest that you use the latest version of kernel-package,
> version 12.036+nmu2, plus the patch which I mention at the end of step 6.
> I wouldn't omit --revision if I were you. I always specify it to match
> the package version of the kernel source package. Read the web
> page, especially step 9, to get my complete methodology for my kernel
> version and kernel revision naming convention. You are, of course,
> entitled to do it differently; but this method makes sense to me.
>
Reply to: