On Sat, 07 May 2005, Manoj Srivastava wrote: <snipp> > > "# work around idiocy in recent kernel versions" i find that output > > quite wierd. localversion was meant for distributions and is much > > easier to use than to change EXTRAVERSION in the Makefile. > > You are just displaying your ignorance. That message is for a > workaround in kernel scripts, where they just delete ./debian on > clean (like, when dpkg-buildpackage is run) -- whether or not they > created the dir.
nevertheless i don't find that your explanation, matches aboves string? also i thought that had been resolved upstream. > >> > also the ouput isn't up to the nice Kbuild of the 2.6, which will > >> > be the common case (afair you also support older non maintained > >> > trees). > >> > >> The output from kernel-package is mostly the output from the > >> underlying kernel build system, so I am intrigued by this comment. > > > well most of the time yes, but not always. for example call > > > ~/src/linux-2.6.11-rc4$ make config > > CLEAN scripts/basic CLEAN scripts/kconfig > > .. > > > ~/src/linux-2.6.11-rc4$ fakroot make-kpkg clean /usr/bin/make -f > > /usr/share/kernel-package/rules real_stamp_clean make[1]: Entering > > directory `/home/max/src/linux-2.6.11-rc4' test ! -f .config || cp > > -pf .config config.precious test -f Makefile && \ /usr/bin/make > > ARCH=i386 distclean make[2]: Entering directory > > `/home/max/src/linux-2.6.11-rc4' .. > > > but i agree that this is an implementation detail. > > And the difference in putput style, which kernel-package has > always had, is somehow technocally releveant? the kbuild system has improved very nicely during the 2.6 stage, i would expect the same standard for the "kernel-package". > If this is the tenor of the complaints you have, I think your > case is pretty darned weak. hmm, indeed i never complained don't know what your reffering to? please explain? > > yup you are right, responded to quickly, make defconfig doesn't make > > sense in that case. but that would make sense for volatile as an > > config for 2.6.8 is not complete for A, who is taking 2.6.11.8 from > > kernel.org and it will get worser. the main difference for using a > > config out of the svn are the modular ide and fb patches by xu, > > which aren't mainline. > > Frankly, starting with the 2.6.8 config is way better than > starting with defconfig, or nothing. > > manoj will depend on the sarge cycle? ;) but anyway i guess your idea is postsarge. -- maks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
