On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 21:16:51 +0100, Robert Millan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2005 at 10:21:58AM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Could you rework this patch with latest version of kernel-package,
>> and make it as little intrusive as possible? The current patch no
>> longer applies cleanly, and makes too many changes that I could not
>> see a reason for.
> I always try to make my patches as little intrusive as possible, but
> this one needed many changes and it's not easy to reduce them.
> Could you point out which of the changes you don't like? Then I
> could send you a partial patch with only the stuff you like, so that
> I don't have to work as much on a moving target. After that, I'll
> be happy to discuss the rest of the hunks with you.
======================================================================
- architecture:=$(DEB_HOST_ARCH)
+ architecture:=$(DEB_HOST_GNU_CPU)
+ ifeq ($(architecture), x86_64)
+ architecture:=amd64
+ endif
======================================================================
Umm. Are you sure it shall not break any other arch there? It
shall break amd64, for instance, and perhaps the hurd ....
ifndef CROSS_COMPILE
ifeq ($(strip $(MAKING_VIRTUAL_IMAGE)),)
ifneq ($(strip $(architecture)),$(strip $(DEB_BUILD_ARCH)))
- KERNEL_CROSS:=$(architecture)-$(strip $(DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM))-
+ KERNEL_CROSS:=$(DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE)
endif
endif
======================================================================
This certainly looks wrong.
manoj
--
You can never tell which way the train went by looking at the tracks.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
