> > cp: cannot stat `arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage': No such file or directory
> >
> > Obviously, this file has moved to arch/x86/boot, but it seems like
> > possibly unnecessary breakage. I've been copying bzImage for years
> > from arch/x86_64/boot, and I'm sure there's a handful of scripts
> > (other than Debian's kernel-image) doing this too.
> >
> > For now, I hacked the tool[1]. Maybe, if we care, a symlink could be
> > set up between arch/x86/boot and arch/$ARCH/boot ? Or would papering
> > over this be more trouble than it's worth?
>
> yeah, a symlink is the right solution i think. Our first-step goal is to
> make the switchover seamless for all practical purposes, and a
> compatibility symlink in arch/i386/boot/ will not hurt. (we shouldnt
> worry about the really old zImage target though)
But when can we then get rid of it?
This is a simple question about when we take the noise..
And right now people know we are shifting to x86 - so it makes
sense to let the dependent userspace tools take the pain now and not later.
Starting to fill up a build kernel with symlinks for compatibility with
random progarms seems to be the wrong approach.
Sam - that dislike especially the asm symlink
-
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]
