Are packages w/o necessary kernel modules allowed?

[Axel Thimm]

On Thu, Oct 15, 2009 at 12:51:01AM -0500, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > > Not likely. dahdi-linux support is pretty spotty. atrpms can go a long time
> > > without having a version for a specific version Fedora. For example there
> > > is no rawhide version now and there was a long period without one for
> > > F11.

I uploaded some F12 builds.

> > about a month or so before the targeted release date (which means
> > about now). I don't think that F11 was w/o dahdi-linux kmdls for any
> > long period.
> 
> Possibly it was during the F11 rawhide period that I looked and I didn't
> check back for a while after the release.
> 
> Unfortunately my tdm card is in my only machine at home that has 3d graphics at
> all working using the drivers in Fedora. And I needed to go to rawhide to
> get that working more than I needed to having tdm card working (though in
> the end I got both).

Give the current packages a try, if there are issues we'll get them fixed.

> > `recursion' warnings due to rpm's limitation of macros depth (which
> > has nothing to do with recursion), which is at 16, but in reality
> > means about 3-4 nested macros.
> 
> Yes. But I didn't see any clear instructions for how to work around it.
> It seems that for some people using --define can work around the problem
> if you know what to define. There was also a comment that you don't see
> the problem because of something in your environment but I didn't see
> any directions on how to set up a similar environment.

I use --define kmdl_kernelsrcdir /.../, that's all. But the error is
still just cosmetic, if I encounter it in a manual build, the build
still succeeds.

> 
> > > What I had to do for F12 is grab a spec file (that get's updates at
> > > the source) that was proposed for rpmfusion (but never got adopted
> > > by them) and then use an svn version of dahdi that has a fix for a
> > > change in the way the kernel is being built (some compatibility
> > > feature that got dropped in 2.6.32).  That box has been extra
> > > unstable lately, though I don't know if that is do to 3D graphics or
> > > dahdi-linux.
> > 
> > Have you tried the common src.rpm at ATrpms? Maybe you should check
> > out ATrpms in a couple of days and see whether there is dahdi support
> > for F12 there.
> 
> I tried using the dahdi-linux src rpm while having atrpms-rpm-config
> installed, but hit the recursion problem and got stuck there. I would
> still have had the problem with the last released dahdi not working
> with 2.6.31 kernels. But fixing that would have taken the same route
> as with the path I ended up taking.
> 

-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20091021/5c3a1783/attachment.sig>