On Wed, Jan 05, 2005 at 01:08:46PM -0200, Andre Costa wrote:
> Previous kernel sources appended version numbers (eg. -1.667) to kernel
> "signature" (uname -r); current sources simply append "-prep" (this
> happened both with 681 and 724 versions). IMHO this is bad because it
> simply overrides any existing -prep version with the new one, demanding
> some manual work to ensure a previous, bootable kernel still exists.
Somethings not going right. It does that early in the built process, but
later on, it shuold change it to be -%{release}[smp].
> 2. there's no support for 'athlon' architecture
> I have an athlon-XP CPU, and if I plainly run 'rpmbuild -bp
> kernel-2.6.spec' it barfs that athlon is not supported and bails out.
> Browsing through spec file I couldn't indeed find specific support
> for it. Any special reason for that?
As I understand it, there's no advantage to picking the athlon architecture
specifically with the 2.6 kernel; it tunes itself as necessary at runtime.
> I know I might be doing something wrong for not using rpm the whole way
> trhough, but shouldn't the above procedure work? (I'd be more than glad
> to do it provided I could use my own tweaked configure file) Any
> relevant points I am missing?
Ahhhh, sorry, I missed that part. That explains your first problem. Go all
the way, and it should work fine.
--
Matthew Miller mattdm@xxxxxxxxxx <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux ------> <http://linux.bu.edu/>
