On Sun, 23 May 2004 20:57:01 +0200, Michael Banck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 07:38:01PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> Well, if I have a collections of patches and want to build a
>> kernel-source package make-kpkg kernel_source sounds like the right
>> tool to archive that, no?
> BTW, while we're at it: Wouldn't now be a good time to check whether
> we still need those kernel-source binary packages? That sounds soooo
> 90s.
There are a lot of people, especially in places like india,
who have access to binary CD's, but not to downloading the sources
over dial up.
> Why don't we have the vanilla[1] kernel as .orig.tar.gz, the debian
> build system as .diff.gz, and the needed patches either in the diff
> as well, or as binary packages the kernel Build-Depends on (possibly
> only for specific architectures). The kernel-images and -headers
> would then be built as binary packages from that source
> package. People who want to build their own kernels should know how
> to run 'apt-get source' by now.
There is something to be said about giving people the ability
to build kernel images from vanilla sources, from strange kernel
source lines, and so on -- and have these be the same quality as
packaged kernels.
manoj
--
[End of diatribe. We now return you to your regularly scheduled
programming...] Larry Wall in Configure from the perl distribution
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
