On Sun, Apr 11, 2004 at 12:48:18PM +0200, Holger Levsen wrote: > Hi, > > [why Sven's boot-floppies don't boot while Jeremie's do] > > Ok, we need to find out what is happeining here. Will we have a (or > > more) oldworld machines at the Munich BSP ? > > On saturday (the whole day) and sunday morning I can participate via IRC.
Cool. > > BTW, Jeremie, maybe you would be interested in coming too ? > > > > > Then I installed unstable, which installed kernel-image-2.4.25-powerpc. > > > This package installs the kernel to /boot/vmlinux-2.4.25-powerpc, but > > > doesn't create a link to /boot/vmlinux. I think this is a bug, because > > > quik (and > > > > Well, it is problematic. The current kernel package is shared by > > oldworld and new world, and the selection of yaboot or quik is done at > > package building time. This is a limitation of kernel-package, which we > > have to somehow work around. I would be really happy if we could get > > ride of it. The idea is for the kernel-modules package to worry about > > modules overwriting, and of the kernel-image package to select at > > install time what boot loader is used, or even better to move this logic > > into the boot-loader packages. > > I'm not talking about bootloader stuff. What I request is that the powerpc Yes, you are. > kernel packages create a link from /boot/vmlinux-2.x.y-whatever to > /boot/vmlinux and that this link is recreated at the re(installation) of a > new kernel-image-package. This is done during the boot loader specific phase of the kernel-package provided postinst, which are mostly broken in the framework of debian-installer, and have a tendency of asking non debconfified questions, and thus killing the install. > That way, quik and yaboot, can both assume the default kernel resides in > /boot/vmlinux. Yeah, but see above. > In my opinion this link should be created by the kernel package not by a > bootloader which only uses the link. Or did I overlook something ? > > > BTW, what version of the kernel did you use, and were you able to boot > > it without problems ? > > The installation kernel was kernel-image-2.4.25-powerpc-pmac-small from > Jeremie and the then installed kernel was kernel-image-2.4.25-powerpc-pmac > from you, Sven. Both worked without problems on a 4400/200. -4 ? -7 ? Which version of it ? > > > Should I fill a bug report against kernel-package-2.4.25-powerpc (quik > > > needs the link) ? > > You can, but it will not bring much. I am aware of this problem, as > > explained above, but it is not an easy fix. > > Do you still think it's difficult to fix and I should not fill a bug report ? It is complicated, not difficult, and i think no bug report is needed. That said, a bug report would help other users in your case, so please fill one. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
