shared /boot support. bz 197065

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 25.03.2008 13:47, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> On Tuesday 25 March 2008 02:02:04 am Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 24.03.2008 20:53, Jarod Wilson wrote:
>>> On Monday 24 March 2008 03:32:37 pm Dave Jones wrote:
>>>> I took a stab at bz 197065 and arrived at the patch below.
>>>> Would appreciate some eyeballs before I commit from people
>>>> familiar with the macro goo in the specfile. (Hi Roland!)
> [...]
>>>> -    install -m 644 .config $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/config-$KernelVer
>>>> -    install -m 644 System.map
>>>> $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/System.map-$KernelVer -    touch
>>>> $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/initrd-$KernelVer.img
>>>> +    install -m 644 .config
>>>> $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/config-$KernelVer.%{_arch} +    install -m 644
>>>> System.map $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/System.map-$KernelVer.%{_arch} +   
>>>> touch $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/initrd-$KernelVer.img.%{_arch}
>>> For the sake of consistency, [...]
>> For the sake of consistency we IMHO should use the same delimiter
>> between "$(uname -r)" and arch in all places. E.g. either "." (like
>> quoted above) everywhere or a "-", like we already use in the devel
>> packages (e.g. /usr/src/kernels/2.6.25-0.141.rc6.git5.fc9-x86_64).
> One thing I like about using "." over "-" is that you'd get 
> 2.6.25-xzy.fc9.x86_64 for uname -r output, which matches up nicely with what 
> rpm -q outputs, now that we're defaulting to outputting n-v-r.arch.

Sounds good. Or, IOW: I'm fine with using "." as delimiter, if we use it 
for the directories found in the devel packages as well.

This whole idea of course means that there are some adjustments needed 
for kmods in livna (or other kernel module packaging schemes). That 
shouldn't be to hard; doing it for F9 might be a bit late, but if you 
guys really want to go that route I'm sure we'll find a way to deal with 
it before F9 ships.

CU
knurd