On Fri, Jan 30, 2004 at 02:47:49AM -0500, J. MacPhail wrote: > Compared with the situation a year or two ago, installing ALSA is > becoming quite easy, partly thanks to a nice explanation in > /usr/share/doc/alsa-source/README.Debian.gz of how to build to match a > kernel-image. Both alsa-source and kernel-patch-*-powerpc are in > quite good shape! But I had some troubles that seem unnecessary, and
Thanks. > maybe we can make the whole thing quite a bit easier. (Note that I > used 2.4.22-6 versions, so maybe I'll get slapped if any of the > following points is already fixed in 2.4.22-7.) Well, the modules build thing is still a bit mysterious to me. But i am working on it. > First, there are different flavours of kernel-image at > ftp://ftp.us.debian.org/debian/pool/main/k/kernel-patch-2.4.22-powerpc. There are indeed 3 flavours : powerpc, powerpc-smp and powerpc-small. The powerpc-smp flavour is for smp machines, and the powerpc one for the rest of them. The powerpc-small one is for oldworld machines needing miboot to boot, as it will fit on a floppy, and will be the default kernel for oldworld machines in the debian-installer. > The package information is quite vague about how the images differ. Each of these flavours come with a common module package, and 4 different image subarches. These are the -pmac (comes with both vmlinux and the .coff image) and the -chrp, -chrp-rs6k and -prep, with the corresponding images to boot on these machines. I guess that the -pmac vmlinux can also be used on chrp and chrp-rs6k using yaboot. > My particular problem was, with a beige G3, do I want the > "powerpc-pmac" flavour, or just the generic "powerpc"? The package There is no generic -powerpc package anymore, and yes you want the powerpc-pmac package, altough it provides the powerpc one for backward compatibility. > information is vague, and gave me no idea where to look. And how am I > supposed to decide whether to use a "small" flavour? My hope is that > some response to this mail will help me file a useful bug report > against kernel-patch-*-powerpc... Well, if you could point me what is confusing in the description files, i will be happy to fix that, but it sounds quite clear to me. It properly states for which machine each image is (pmacs, chrp, chrp-rs6k or prep), and i believe that it also mentions the reason for the smp or normal powerpc flavours. I have to check for the small version, where i may have missed things though. > Second, my first try at installing ALSA ran into a problem, helpfully > pointed out by insmod, that I was using a gcc of inappropriate vintage > compared to the kernel image. Running "dpkg-deb --info" does not tell > what gcc version was used to compile a package. How was I supposed to > know? Should the info for a kernel-image package state what gcc > version was used to compile it? If this is a bug, whose is it?? What ALSA modules where you installing, from where did you get them, and how where they built ? > Third, when I let the debian/rules from the alsa-source package guess > the kernel version, it guessed "KVERS=2.4.22", resulting in modules > being install in /lib/modules/2.4.22/alsa/ rather than the correct > /lib/modules/2.4.22-powerpc/alsa/. This presumably is a bug either in > alsa-source or in kernel-patch-*-powerpc, but which?? More probably a problem with make-kpkg, i believe. How did you try to build it ? But true enough, things are not as neat as they should, i believe that you could be building the modules with only the kernel-headers, but i have no idea how this is suppossed to work. Friendly, Sven Luther
