On 17 June 2011 09:42, Evangelos Foutras wrote:
> On 17 June 2011 08:20, Madhurya Kakati wrote:
>> Yes I know how build specific packages in PKGBUILD. I want to know that
>> do i have to compile and install the kernel header and kernel docs
>> package or should I install only the kernel package?
On 17 June 2011 08:20, Madhurya Kakati wrote:
> Yes I know how build specific packages in PKGBUILD. I want to know that
> do i have to compile and install the kernel header and kernel docs
> package or should I install only the kernel package?
Headers are included in the kernel26-mainline package
On 06/16/2011 11:21 PM, cantabile wrote:
> On 06/16/2011 08:44 PM, Madhurya Kakati wrote:
>> On 06/16/2011 10:57 AM, Christian Hesse wrote:
>>> Madhurya Kakati on Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:38:35
>>> +0530:
I want to test the linux3.0 kerne. Whats the most easiest way to test
it? Is there a AUR
Am Thu, 16 Jun 2011 23:21:15 +0200
schrieb Jan Steffens :
> Because the install stuff isn't a multi-line field (of which there are
> none), it's a bash script defining functions.
The install scripts are meant for stuff which needs to be done after
the package installation directly on the system l
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Matthew Monaco wrote:
> But a lot of the stuff in the PKGBUILD is copied into the package database,
> so why is the install stuff an exception? I don't think it'd be the only
> multi-line field.
Because the install stuff isn't a multi-line field (of which there a
But a lot of the stuff in the PKGBUILD is copied into the package database, so
why is the install stuff an exception? I don't think it'd be the only multi-line
field.
On 06/16/2011 04:29 PM, Daenyth Blank wrote:
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 16:27, Matthew Monaco wrote:
It seems like the install f
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 16:27, Matthew Monaco wrote:
> It seems like the install functions pre/post_install/upgrade/remove could be
> defined right in the PKGBUILD. Any particular reason why this isn't or
> cannot be so?
>
This has come up on the ML before. It's because the PKGBUILD file is
not i
It seems like the install functions pre/post_install/upgrade/remove could be
defined right in the PKGBUILD. Any particular reason why this isn't or cannot be so?
On 06/16/2011 08:44 PM, Madhurya Kakati wrote:
On 06/16/2011 10:57 AM, Christian Hesse wrote:
Madhurya Kakati on Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:38:35
+0530:
I want to test the linux3.0 kerne. Whats the most easiest way to test
it? Is there a AUR package? I couldn't find it.
kernel26-mainline 3.0rc3-1
ht
On 06/16/2011 10:57 AM, Christian Hesse wrote:
> Madhurya Kakati on Thu, 16 Jun 2011 10:38:35
> +0530:
>> I want to test the linux3.0 kerne. Whats the most easiest way to test
>> it? Is there a AUR package? I couldn't find it.
> kernel26-mainline 3.0rc3-1
> https://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php?I
I know it's tempting, but keep in mind there's really nothing different about
this kernel. So don't go out of your way unless you typically test the -rc
kernels or there is a specific feature you're looking for.
On 06/16/2011 01:08 AM, Madhurya Kakati wrote:
Hi,
I want to test the linux3.0 ker
11 matches
Mail list logo
