No more kernel-source(code) ??? (was: rawhide report: 20040623 changes)

[Axel Thimm]

On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 07:44:15PM -0400, Chris Kloiber wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Jun 2004 01:23:38 +0200, Axel Thimm <axel.thimm at atrpms.net> wrote:
> > 
> > On Wed, Jun 23, 2004 at 07:20:32AM -0400, Build System wrote:
> > > kernel-2.6.7-1.448
> > > * Mon Jun 21 2004 Arjan van de Ven <arjanv at redhat.com>
> > >
> > > - make kernel-doc and kernel-sourcecode builds independent of eachother
> > > - disable kernel-sourcecode builds entirely, we'll be replacing it with documentation
> > >   on how to use the src.rpm instead for building your own kernel.
> > 
> > We just recently had the discussion of how many documented processes
> > will get broken with the kernel-source -> kernel-sourcecode
> > change. Not having it at all doesn't really improve that. ;)
> > 
> > What's the idea behind this? And what about people building external
> > kernel modules? For the reasons outlined in the previous thread on
> > this /lib/modules/`uname -r` is not adequate for that. Having the
> > kernel-source package change its name is one thing we can adapt
> > to (even though it was not necessary). Having it disappear for the
> > face of earth is another :(
> > 
> > Please, get it back!
> 
> While I'm far from an expert, the headers needed to build 3rd party
> modules are now packaged with the kernel proper (that's one reason
> it's taking so long to install a new kernel nowadays).

In theory, yes, but try to build a kernel module for i686 on an athlon
box. The kernel sources will clash with the running kernel.

Also it is quite an overshooting to have to install a foreign kernel
for a simple build of a kernel module. Installing/Uninstalling the
kernel will take more time than the kernel module build itself. But
that could be solved by packaging the headers in separate (from the
kernel) packages.

> The kernel-sourcecode package is sort of redundant as the actual
> source is in the kernel*.src.rpm anyway, but can be built (as i did)
> by editing the kernel-2.6.spec and changing the line near the top to
> say "build sourcecode=1" instead of 0.

Of course, but if the kernel-source(code) gets considered obsolete and
deprecated this will not stay for long there.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20040624/6100a6fc/attachment.sig>