Eduard Bloch schrieb am Monday, den 28. February 2005:
> #include <hallo.h>
> * Micah Anderson [Fri, Feb 25 2005, 06:33:19PM]:
>
> > Then I am presented with a menu of confusing options, I can list
> > binary packages (binary packages of what?),
>
> Should I rename that? To what? Suggestions welcome.
>
> "Installable module packages" maybe?
I think it should be renamed, but because I dont really understand
what it does, I can't suggest an alternative. I understand the SEARCH
option below, but what does the list binary packages do? How are these
different?
> > I can SEARCH (search for what?),
>
> Search in the apt-pool for pre-built package, shipped by Debian.
> Suggest a better description.
"Search in apt repositories for pre-built packages for the module(s)
selected" is clear. I think the problem is that you want a one
word option, but there is no single word (at least in english) that
makes it clear what you are searching for. If there was a help dialog
where you could get the description "Search your apt repositories for
pre-built packages for the module(s) selected" so if you did not
understand what SEARCH was for, you could select that to get more
information. The other possibility is to present a description of what
each option is, with a description, before you are presented with the
menu, however the first option seems more clear.
I see that these options are detailed in the first menu if you select
OVERVIEW, which helps, but the details of the "submenu" are not in the
OVERVIEW, nor is there an OVERVIEW in the submenu.
> > I can GET (get what? I try it and it gets some loop-aes
> > things, not what I would call intuitive, but ok),
>
> That is the download/installation of the source package. Should I rename
> that? Into what exactly?
Maybe this:
"GET Get or update the selected source package(s)"
I wasn't sure if GET was going to get the source package for the
module that I was looking to build, because I wasn't sure what "the
source package" was referring to... also, is this menu item necessary
if BUILD takes care of getting the sources if you did not GET them?
> > I can BUILD (I assume loop-aes, since that is selected).
>
> Yup
Maybe:
"BUILD Build packages for selected module(s)"
> > So I try BUILD and it says
> > "The source package may not to be installed. Would you"
>
> Hm. This is a longer line and should have been broken by the dialog
> tool? Is the dialog package installed?
> Anyways, I could force the line break.
No, dialog is not installed, perhaps it should Depend on dialog,
rather than suggest it?
> > I try to make my window huge, I still don't get all of the message.
>
> Sounds like whiptail problems. Can you scroll with the cursor buttons?
No, it seems to be an artifact of having whiptail installed, but not
dialog?
> > It fails to build a module if you follow its instructions. If you want
>
> It fails especially because you need a complete source tree. I added
> something to warn the user about the suspicous module, but it will need
> some time to find its way into the archive.
Ah, I see, this makes sense... the other modules I have tried with
module-assistant seem to work as expected, so it must be that loop-aes
requires something additional.
> > doesn't the curses GUI do this for you? What the message is that I am
>
> It could... but it would be like a stupid MS wizard ("Should I do a?
> Press ok." and then it extracts 300mb in the background but shows the
> users a progress bar. aaaargh)
If it tells you that it wont work unless you have a full source tree,
or do the fakesource thing, then this isn't necessary of course.
> The new warning says:
>
> Warning: the selected module source is known to require a complete
> kernel source structure in order to be built correctly. However, only
> a reduced version of the source (kernel-headers) has been found, so
> the build process will probably fail.
>
> In order to get a full kernel source, you have the following options:
>
> - fake the source directory - create one that may look very similar
> to the one that has been used to build your kernel (based on its
> configuration and fresh source archive). The results are uncertain,
> but it should work in most cases.
> Call \"module-assistant fakesource\" to automate this.
> - use a custom kernel built from scratch (custom configuration,
> custom source, custom kernel package installed). Please read the
> Kernel HOWTO and/or make-kpkg documentation for the further steps.
>
> Is that clear enough?
I think there is another option... if you are using a debian installed
kernel-image, you can apt-get install kernel-source-2.x.x and then
untar that source in /usr/src, if you get the kernel source of the
kernel-image that you are running, and have not compiled your own,
then you should be fine. Maybe this is what "fake the source
directory" means?
thanks!
micah
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
