On Wed, Feb 09, 2000 at 10:49:50AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Wed, Feb 09, 2000 at 09:39:29AM +0100, Hartmut Koptein wrote: > > > In working on the boot floppies code, I finally sat down and cleaned up > > > the > > > kernel packages for powerpc. I've made a set of > > > kernel-patch-2.2.14-powerpc > > > > Why not the kernel-image-xxx package? kernel-patch is obsolete. The control > > with the kernel-image package is much better then with the kernel-patches. > > You have no dependencies for debmake, kernel-package and some others. > > I did try kernel-image packages; I found that kernel-patch worked much > better. I've rewritten its rules almost from scratch. If you really > want to stick with kernel-image, I suppose that's OK, but there's no > real reason to have our own full kernel source in the archive when a > small-in-comparison patch works just fine. I just need to fix one or > two buglets in my rules file and it will build all the necessary > kernels automatically.
err, maybe i misunderstood, but the kernel-image source package only contains the patches, and will source depend on kernel-source-version to get the full kernel. > > Please ask next time the maintainer. > > That's why I didn't upload them. You haven't been around much, and I > desperately needed 2.2.14 kernels. How do you solve the problem of kernel-package generated kernel-image being refused because they don't have a source line in the control file ? > > > Now I need to fix quik and console-data... > > > > I cannot test quik here. console-data is my resort, now that i'm back from > > holidays. > > Console-data may be taken care of. Joey Hess was working on it all of > Monday. I'm seeing right now if it builds. Last i checked it still didn't work on apus, will check it nextly. Friendly, Sven LUTHER
