On 2010-07-20 3:53 PM, Antonio Grassi wrote: > Hi Bas! Thanks for your response. The approach you comment around > maintaining the Linux Version is interesting. At LibreWRT we've > discussed for a while around the best way to handle the alternative > kernel inclusion. Your comment helps in clearly separating the LibreWRT > stuff, which would help maintain this. > > Other parts of the patch sent, deal with directory hierarchy & tarball > naming convention differences between kernel.org <http://kernel.org> and > the Libre Linux site. To avoid dealing with these differences, we tried > a second approach, which is also included in the patch: instead of > downloading deblobed kernel sources, we could deblob the vanilla kernel > sources as part of the build process, making use of the "deblobing > scripts" [1] provided by Libre Linux. This approach requires the > deblobing scripts to be downloaded at "run time" or be included in the > sources, for example, under a new sub directory 'scripts/deblob/'. What > do you think about this? They should not be put into scripts/deblob/, because scripts/ is reserved for OpenWrt scripts, which are maintained as part of our SVN. It's much easier to just create a new directory in tools/, which downloads the packages and installs them like any other host tool that we use. That way, the scripts are available long before the kernel sources are unpacked.
I also think it would be much better to include the deblob code as part of the build process instead of downloading separate tarballs and spreading version number hacks all over the place. It also helps to get rid of the arbitrary restriction of the deblob option on the xburst and x86 targets. - Felix _______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list openwrt-devel@lists.openwrt.org https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
