>>"David" == David Pastern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
David> What is the difference between apt getting the kernel-image
David> versus kernel-source?
The former is the compiled kernel image, that can be used for
booting the sytem, complete with modules and all, the latter is the
siurce, that you can configu re yourself and build into a kernel
image.
David> I noticed that the kernel-source d/l to /usr/src. Then I
David> untarred it and went into the newly created dir and ran make.
David> I then compiled the kernel and modules. After doing that I
David> ran "make dep && make clean". Then I did "make bzImage". I
David> then did "make modules" and then "make modules_install". Once
David> that was all done I did "depmod -a".
David> Once done I copied the System.map and bzImage files to the
David> /boot dir and then renamed them with appropriate names. I
David> then had to manually update lilo.conf and then restart lilo.
David> Reboot and hey presto! Is the way i've done it wrong? It
David> seems to have worked for me, and it was advice I received from
David> a friend (a debian user), reading from several books and man
David> pages. Please let me know if i'm doing things wrong. It does
David> seem to have worked, and corresponds to what I read in my
David> books!
That does indeed work. But now the packaging system (dpkg)
does not know you have that image isntalled, and can't be used to
remove it. And you had to remember to do several things in sequence
-- and I generally forget something crucial.
If you install kernel-package, you get a command called make-kpkg.
Advantages of using make-kpkg
---------- -- ----- ---------
I have been asked several times about the advantages of using
the kernel-package package over the traditional Linux way of hand
compiling kernels, and I have come up with this list. This is off the
top of my head, I'm sure to have missed points yet. Any additions
welcomed.
i) Convenience. I used to compile kernels manually, and it
involved a series of steps to be taken in order;
kernel-package was written to take all the required steps (it
has grown beyond that now, but essentially, that is what it
does). This is especially important to novices: make-kpkg
takes all the steps required to compile a kernel, and
installation of kernels is a snap.
ii) It allows you to keep multiple version of kernel images on
your machine with no fuss.
iii) It has a facility for you to keep multiple flavours of the
same kernel version on your machine (you could have a stable
2.0.33 version, and a 2.0.33 version patched with the latest
drivers, and not worry about contaminating the modules in
/lib/modules).
iv) It knows that some architectures do not have vmlinuz (using
vmlinux instead), and others use zImage rather than bzImage,
and calls the appropriate target, and takes care of moving the
correct file into place.
v) Several other kernel module packages are hooked into
kernel-package, so one can seamlessly compile, say, pcmcia
modules at the same time as one compiles a kernel, and be
assured that the modules so compiled are compatible.
vi) It enables you to use the package management system to keep
track of the kernels created. Using make-kpkg creates a .deb
file, and dpkg can track it for you. This facilitates the task
of other packages that depend on the kernel packages.
vii) It keeps track of the configuration file for each kernel image
in /boot, which is part of the image package, and hence the
kernel image and the configuration file are always together.
viii) It allows you to specify a directory with config files, with
separate config files for each subarchitecture (even allows
for different config files for i386, i486, etc). It is really
neat for people who need to compile kernels for a variety of
sub architectures.
ix) It allows to create a package with the headers, or the
sources, also as a deb file, and enables the package
management system to keep track of those (and there are
packages that depend on the package management system being
aware of these packages).
x) Since the kernel image package is a full fledged Debian
package, it comes with maintainer scripts, which take care of
details like offering to make a boot disk, manipulating
symbolic links in / so that you can make boot loader scripts
static (just refer to the symbolic links, rather than the real
image files; the names of the symbolic links do not change,
but the kernel image file names change with the version).
xi) There is support for the multitudinous subarchitectures that
have blossomed under the umbrella of the m68k and powerpc
architectures.
xii) There is support there for optionally applying patches to the
kernel provided as a kernel-patch .deb file, and building a
patched kernel auto-magically, and still retain an UN-patched
kernel source tree.
xiii) Allows one to compile a kernel for another computer, for
example using a fast machine to compile the kernel for
installation on a slower machine. This is really nice since
the modules are all included in the .deb; and one does not
have to deal with modules manually.
xiv) The postinst looks at a configuration file on the installation
machine (as opposed to the machine that the image was compiled
on), and allows the local admin to decide on issues of
symbolic links, and whether the boot loader stuff must be
run, and whether one wants to create a boot floppy or not.
xv) The postinst and the postrm scripts allow the local admin on
the installation machine to add a script into runtime hooks;
this can allow, amongst other things, grub users to add and
remove kernel image stanzas from the grub menu (example
scripts to do this are in the package).
xvi) One can append to the kernel version on the command line, or
by setting an environment variable. So if your kernel is
called kernel-image-2.4.1John.Home; it is unlikely to be
overridden by the official 2.4.1 kernel, since they are not the
same version.
Disadvantages of using make-kpkg
------------- -- ----- ---------
i) This is a cookie cutter approach to compiling kernels, and
there are people who like being close to the bare metal.
ii) This is not how it is done in the non-Debian world. This
flouts tradition. (It has been pointed out, though, that this
is fast becoming Debian tradition)
iii) It forces you to use fakeroot or sudo or super or be root to
create a kernel image .deb file (this is not as bad as it
used to be before fakeroot).
manoj
--
Philosophy: unintelligible answers to insoluble problems.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
