On 12.09.2007 20:03, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-09-12 at 10:31 -0700, Dan Stromberg wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 19:09:26 +0200, Bernd Petrovitsch wrote:
> [...]
>>> Fedora BTW abandoned kernel-source* and they have now a website with a
>>> description
>>> how to produce a configured kernel source tree (e.g. for out-of-tree
>>> modules).
That explanation is IMHO a bit misleading. Fedora ships kernel-devel
packages for all their kernels. Those contain everything from the
source-tree that's needed to build out-of-tree modules -- Makefiles for
example, but no real sources.
Well, to be more precise: that is enought for out-of-tree modules that
get shipped with proper Makefiles/Layout, which is the case for nearly
every external module these days. The "website with a description how to
produce a configured kernel source tree" exists as well, for people that
want to build kernels the way the Fedora builds them, but want to apply
additional patches/other sources.
>> So this is as smooth as producing kernel-source RPM's gets?
> I had no problems with the kernel-source.*.rpm approach.
I think the Fedora approach has many benefits -- I always wondered why
it never went upstream like a "make install_develstuff" that install all
the needed bits to
/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/build/
CU
knurd
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
