Andrei Pelinescu - Onciul wrote: > robert_wilhelm_land wrote: > > > [...] > > As far as I'm concerned most distributions and README's recommend to > > create a linux/ dir as a sub of src/ and I did so. > > In the end this makes up: > > /usr/src/linux/kernel-source-2.2.17/arch/i386/boot > > - after x-tar'ing the kernet-sourcexx.tar.gz. Usually you find a > > kernel image file in the above mentioned ..arch/i386/boot (not the > > /boot!) and exactly there is none. > > The impression I get now is - after reading your explaination - step > > 2a/b would not work without step b/c (dpkg -i ../some-kernel-package > > needs a *.deb file) which I would rather discribe as masochistic > > because I have to learn another new kernel-build process which relies > > only on Debian and cannot be used on other distributions. > > A small example of what you call "masochistic": > > cd /usr/src/linux-2.2.18pre18 > make config|menuconfig|xconfig > make-kpkg --revision 9:blabla kernel_image > dpkg -i ../kernel-image-2.2.18pre18_blabla*.deb
If you keep up to debian - no problem, Andrei. In a few years we might have 10 linux distributers and 10 diffrent kernel build routines - big fun! > > Likewise, my > > previous kernel-build process can be put into /dev/null because no > > one knows what exactly happens using dpkg and make-kpkg and is not > > able to tell where to find my kernel image file! Now that not what I > > would expect which I would discribe as the "linux spirit". > > You can use the classic kernel build process if you want (make clean dep > bzImage modules modules_install). The kernel image will be in > arch/i386/boot. > > [...] > > Andrei Oh sure - how many times did I report it didn't? I'll do it all over again. Did you control it the last time you made one? Robert
