Cyril Brulebois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (13/06/2008):
> Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (13/06/2008):
> > Ideally the .config files used to build the standard Debian kernels
> > would be available in a light-weight package. I think the only
> > solution currently is to install that package and get t
Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (13/06/2008):
> Ideally the .config files used to build the standard Debian kernels
> would be available in a light-weight package. I think the only
> solution currently is to install that package and get the
> configuration from /boot/config-.
You may play aroun
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> I think the only solution currently is to install that package and
> get the configuration from /boot/config-.
Or just go to http://merkel.debian.org/~jurij/ and download them.
Don Armstrong
--
One day I put instant coffee in my microwave oven and
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 11:31:14AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> You should be installing the linux-source-x.x.x package instead and
> using make-kpkg to build custom kernels. The source package (rather
> than the linux-source-x.x.x binary package) is not meant to make custom
> kernels.
Ideall
On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 11:52:47AM +0200, Agustin Martin wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 09:35:28PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 05:23:19PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 08:31:47PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > > > My problem with make-kp
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 09:35:28PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 05:23:19PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 08:31:47PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > > My problem with make-kpkg has always been that I could never rely on its
> > > generated -heade
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 09:35:28PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 05:23:19PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 08:31:47PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > > My problem with make-kpkg has always been that I could never rely on its
> > > generated -heade
On Sun, Jun 08, 2008 at 12:41:01AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> I find that attitute totally unacceptable.
Well it looks that way to me. In fact I would say that is true of ever
source package. The goal is to make the maintainers job easy, since
they are the ones that deal with the source package.
On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 11:31:14 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
>On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 11:51:04AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
>> Shouldn't that be easier to do, and - most of all - documented?
>
>Playing with source packages isn't normal.
>The package is designed to make the life of
On Sat, 7 Jun 2008 14:53:03 +0200, Holger Levsen
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Saturday 07 June 2008 11:51, Marc Haber wrote:
>> Shouldn't that be easier to do,
>
>Send patches?! ;)
Since I pay more attention to my personal and mental health, I tend to
minimize my contact to the Debian Kernel "Te
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 09:35:28PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> Taken to another system?
I don't remember if I did or not.
> The problems I remember:
>
> 1. the "source" and "build" links pointed to an incorrect place. An
> invalid build link is a problem.
Where do they point?
> 2. If I actua
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 05:23:19PM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 08:31:47PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> > My problem with make-kpkg has always been that I could never rely on its
> > generated -headers packages to actually work.
>
> Odd, the headers it generated allway
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 08:31:47PM +, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> My problem with make-kpkg has always been that I could never rely on its
> generated -headers packages to actually work.
Odd, the headers it generated allways worked for me.
> So it was fine to build a kernel. But if I wanted to bui
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 11:31:14AM -0400, Lennart Sorensen wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 11:51:04AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> > Shouldn't that be easier to do, and - most of all - documented?
>
> Playing with source packages isn't normal. It used to be much worse
> (2.6.8 in sarge involved bu
On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 11:51:04AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> Shouldn't that be easier to do, and - most of all - documented?
Playing with source packages isn't normal. It used to be much worse
(2.6.8 in sarge involved building multiple packages, one which depended
on the other). The package is
Hi Marc,
On Saturday 07 June 2008 11:51, Marc Haber wrote:
> Shouldn't that be easier to do,
Send patches?! ;)
> and - most of all - documented?
http://wiki.debian.org/HowToRebuildAnOfficialDebianKernelPackage
regards,
Holger
pgprFz3NRVvRf.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 22:31:09 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
(Lennart Sorensen) wrote:
>On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 10:14:09PM +0200, Mauro Ziliani wrote:
>> Hi all.
>> I need to rebuild only the linux-image-2.6.18-6-686 deb package from
>> source code.
>> How can I do that without rebuild all packages in lin
On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 10:14:09PM +0200, Mauro Ziliani wrote:
> Hi all.
> I need to rebuild only the linux-image-2.6.18-6-686 deb package from
> source code.
> How can I do that without rebuild all packages in linux-2.6.18 sources
> (xen, k7,vserver)?
Remove the other ones from debian/arch/i386
18 matches
Mail list logo
