[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: compiling (or rather, failing to compile) a kernel

On Sun, Nov 11, 2012 at 5:16 AM, Ralf Mardorf
<ralf.mardorf@alice-dsl.net> wrote:
> I don't have time to read the current howto now, but I'll read it ASAP.
> It describes the way I build Debian and Ubuntu kernels since years, but
> while my scripts are a little bit outdated, Stephen updated his howto.
> However, even my outdated scripts still do work. I used a script
> version from Wheezy to build a kernel for my current Ubuntu ...
> $ uname -v #1 SMP PREEMPT RT Fri Nov 2 21:36:37 CET 2012 ... so 9 days
> ago this old style to build a kernel still worked.
> I remember one issue that occurred very often,
> in /lib/modules/KERNEL_VERSION the /build and /source links were
> missing or bad.
> At least for Ubuntu this still is an issue, right now I noticed
> "build -> /usr/src/linux-3.6.5-rt14" but correct would be linked
> against "linux-headers-3.6.5-rt14".
> IIRC this was an issue for my latest Debian installs too.
> +1 for old school. I'm pro progress, but IMO it isn't alway progress to
> use new methods, to do old things. Most of the times new methods tend to
> fail, e.g. systemd [1] makes many *nix users to switch from Linux to
> another *nix. Basic workflow only should change, if it's really
> useful. We aren't building kernels very often, so we should be able to
> relay on a method that always can be used, without reading tons of fine
> manuals. I'm cleaning my tableware, but I don't change the old dishes
> with new once, new tableware might look nicer, but it don't add any
> new features, it only needs resources to get new tableware and it's
> risky, since it might no be as dishwasher-proof as the tableware I
> already own.
> I hope we won't lose manifoldness for Linux :(.
> [1] Arch Linux did ban peole from the users mailing list that argued
> against systemd and meanwhile upstream makes systemd a dependency for
> even DEs. I'm writing to this list and get replies off-list, because
> some people aren't allowed to write to this list anymore.

Thanks for the continued rants about Arch, systemd, and Linux; your
point has yet to sink in! :)

A bug report was filed more or less a year ago about make-kpkg's
kernel_headers target not creating the build and source symlinks (or
creating them incorrectly) but I can't find it at the moment.

You can force the build symlink to point at the "right" directory by copying

You could create a "force-source-link" script to do the same for the
source symlink if you're unhappy with the current make-kpkg default.

"make deb-pkg" creates the build symlink in the debbuild script but
doesn't create the source symlink.

Reply to: