Hi, Christian T. Steigies writes:
> So when I want to create an updated patch, I need a tree with the > first patch applied, a tree with the second patch applied, plus an > upstream tree and a linux-CVS tree where I get my m68k patches from, > all unpacked? This whole thread only deals with handling the patches that go into the kernel-source package itself. For creating kernel-patch-m68k packages, you can basically do whatever you like. > I just managed to build all seven 2.4.26 images from one source > package, I guess every arch maintainer has to design his own system > for that, or do we have a best practices document somewhere? I think the only "best practice" right now is to depend on kernel-tree, and use kernel-package as much as possible. If you are interested in seeing how others do it, you can read the debian/rules files of the various kernel-image packages. Most of them are already available in svn. > now all kernel images for all arches should be built from one source > package? No. > Thats why I'd like to keep a kernel-patch-m68k package around, That's perfect. Depend on kernel-tree, read its changelog when an update comes in, then see for yourself whether you need to rebuild. Regards, Jens. -- J'qbpbe, le m'en fquz pe j'qbpbe! Le veux aimeb et mqubib panz je pézqbpbe je djuz tqtaj!
