Re: Building a kernel-source RPM (not a kernel RPM)?

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 12.09.2007 20:03, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 10:31 -0700, Dan Stromberg wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 19:09:26 +0200, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> [...]
>>> Fedora BTW abandoned kernel-source* and they have now a website with a
>>> description
>>> how to produce a configured kernel source tree (e.g. for out-of-tree
>>> modules).

That explanation is IMHO a bit misleading. Fedora ships kernel-devel
packages for all their kernels. Those contain everything from the
source-tree that's needed to build out-of-tree modules -- Makefiles for
example, but no real sources.

Well, to be more precise: that is enought for out-of-tree modules that
get shipped with proper Makefiles/Layout, which is the case for nearly
every external module these days. The "website with a description how to
produce a configured kernel source tree" exists as well, for people that
want to build kernels the way the Fedora builds them, but want to apply
additional patches/other sources.

>> So this is as smooth as producing kernel-source RPM's gets?
> I had no problems with the kernel-source.*.rpm approach.

I think the Fedora approach has many benefits -- I always wondered why
it never went upstream like a "make install_develstuff" that install all
the needed bits to
  /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/build/

CU
knurd


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/