I think editing the systemwide template should be discouraged. Is it perhaps an issue of the linux-image-unsigned-XXX package? Shouldn't it simply Provide linux-image-XXX?
I am also not sure why some arch specific builds (e.g., amd64, arm64) have an -unsigned binary package and other don't (e.g., i386). Copying from https://kernel-team.pages.debian.net/kernel-handbook/ch-packaging.html#s-arch-dep: ``` linux-image-version-abiname[-featureset]-flavour-unsigned This package contains the binary kernel image and pre-built binary modules for a particular arch/featureset/flavour combination, that are meant to be signed and copied into a package without the -unsigned suffix. There is normally no need to install these packages. ``` Does the above hold for linux-image-unsigned-5.2.0-050200rc6-generic_5.2.0-050200rc6.201906222033_amd64.deb? I tend to believe that his is more an issue with the kernel mainline build rather than with DKMS. -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1835429 Title: Package generated with mkbmdeb fails to be installed when using kernel mainline build To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/dkms/+bug/1835429/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
