On Thu, 2005-09-15 at 09:07 +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2005 at 04:00:53PM +0900, Horms wrote: > > > I have done a second build, with the following changes, as > > > 2.6.12-5.99.sarge2 > > > Only the first change is relevant, URL as immediately above :) > > > > > > * Change kernel-source build dependancy to > > > kernel-package (>= 8.135) [!powerpc] | kernel-package (>= > > > 8.135.sarge1) [powerpc] > > > so that this package can be build on an unmodified sarge install > > > on non-powerpc > > > * Add myself and Sven Luther as uploaders > > > > I have withrawn the 2.6.12-5.99.sarge2 packages, and the URL above > > now only has the 2.6.12-5.99.sarge1 variant. > > > > The reason for this is, despite the build dependancy, they were actually > > built with kernel-package 8.135.sarge1, so they are identical to the > > 2.6.12-5.99.sarge1 packages. Furthermore, I have been advised > > by Andres Salomon and Sven Luther that kernel-package 8.135 > > cannot build these packages because because of incompatibility > > with the defconfig target - I don't know more than that. > > Well, defconfig is used to build some generic packages, docs and such, the fix > is rather orthogonal to anything else, small and localized, and has no chance > of breaking anything, the same goes for the powerpc/powerpc64 targets. I thus > propose that we do a kernel-package 8.135.sarge1 upload to > stable-proposed-updates, Manoj, do you have an opinion on this ?
Or we could upload a kernel-package 8.135volatile1 to volatile... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
