Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Juan" == Juan Cespedes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Juan> On Thu, Jan 22, 1998 at 11:05:25PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava
> Juan> wrote:
> >> Should I change the architecture of the kernel-headers package
> >> from all to any?
>
> Juan> I think so.
>
> I am working on this (and a few other things suggested by
> James Troup) as we speak.
>
> manoj
I'm using kernel-package to build kernel-{image,headers} for sparc since a
week. I did several fixes especially to use silo instead of lilo at
installation time. I will file a bug against it as soon as I'll sure they will
be almost error prone. I didn't have enough time to test it extensively as I'm
also working on boot disks for sparc...
I made my kernel-image package from sparclinux 2.0.33 sources, not the Debian
kernel-source 2.0.33 package because the latter doesn't work on sparc.
In order to upload kernel-image along with its sources, should I create a
dedicated kernel-source-sparc package or requests the diffs to be merged into
the Debian kernel-source ?
Sparclinux kernel sources are about 7MB & only 680KB for the diffs against
stock 2.0.33. Therefore, if I upload full sources it will take more space on
the ftp server than including the diffs in the current kernel tree.
What is the best solution ?
Is a big diff against current kernel-source 2.0.33 acceptable ?
What is the status of other architectures ? Are they using current 2.0.33
kernel-source package ?
Thanks in advance.
--
Eric Delaunay | "La guerre justifie l'existence des militaires.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | En les supprimant." Henri Jeanson (1900-1970)
