On Fri, Nov 04, 2005 at 05:43:41PM +0100, Gilles wrote: > I'm interested in finding out why my experience of "m-a" doesn't seem > to agree with yours. > > Maybe I didn't read the man page carefully enough; this is the invocation > I used: > > m-a build -t -u $MA_DIR -k $KERNEL_DIR $MODULE
I have never used the -u option. I have used the -k option at times. > where $KERNEL_DIR is the kernel source directory used to build the > kernel image and "in-kernel" modules. > This directory contains a "conf.vars" file that contains: > > VERSION = 2 > PATCHLEVEL = 6 > SUBLEVEL = 14 > EXTRAVERSION = -vs2.1.0-rc5 > APPEND_TO_VERSION = +g2 > KPKG_SELECTED_MODULES = > Debian Revision = 3:custom.1.0.0 > KPKG_ARCH = > do_parallel = -j3 > fast_dep = -j3 > > And the debian package built by "m-a" did not include the "+g2". Well looking at module assistant it appears to grab the KDREV from the changelog or something of the kernel-source/headers. On the other hand I have NEVER used a + in the append-to-version and I am not sure it is even supposed to be allowed, it certainly is discouraged to use + in the version or packagename in general. I always just have the append-to-version use dashes between things. > I certainly agree that if one does not have the actual kernel source > tree available, it is handier to use "m-a". Otherwise, "make-kpkg" > is equally fine I guess. > > The worry is that the *result* is different, for me at least. Well try not using + in your append-to-version and maybe it will work better. Often I actually just edit the makefile to add what I want appended, so I won't forget it when building with make-kpkg. Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
