On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 09:21:50AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:31:49PM -0600, John Wright wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 08:36:27PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 10:45:23AM -0600, John Wright wrote:
> > > > + +$(MAKE_CLEAN) -C $(DIR
Hi -
On Thu, Jul 16, 2009 at 09:21:50AM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> [...]
> > THis would be ideal. Current tools like "crash" don't work with an
> > image that's been stripped with "--only-keep-debug". I'm not sure what
> > strip is removing that crash needs, but I'll look into it.
>
> This w
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:31:49PM -0600, John Wright wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 08:36:27PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 10:45:23AM -0600, John Wright wrote:
> > > + +$(MAKE_CLEAN) -C $(DIR) modules_install
> > > INSTALL_MOD_PATH='$(CURDIR)'/$(PACKAGE_DIR) INSTALL_
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 08:36:27PM +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 10:45:23AM -0600, John Wright wrote:
> > install-image_$(ARCH)_$(FEATURESET)_$(FLAVOUR)_plain:
>
> This is not the correct target.
Can you elaborate? Do you mean it should go in its own target?
> > + +$(
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 10:45:23AM -0600, John Wright wrote:
> tags 365349 + patch
> thanks
>
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:45:29AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:02:52PM -0400, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > On 14/07/09 at 09:47 +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > > > On Mo
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 10:45:23AM -0600, John Wright wrote:
> install-image_$(ARCH)_$(FEATURESET)_$(FLAVOUR)_plain:
This is not the correct target.
> + +$(MAKE_CLEAN) -C $(DIR) modules_install
> INSTALL_MOD_PATH='$(CURDIR)'/$(PACKAGE_DIR) INSTALL_MOD_STRIP=1
> + +$(MAKE_CLEAN) -C $(DIR
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 10:45:23AM -0600, John Wright wrote:
> tags 365349 + patch
> thanks
>
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:45:29AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:02:52PM -0400, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > On 14/07/09 at 09:47 +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > > > On Mo
tags 365349 + patch
thanks
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:45:29AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:02:52PM -0400, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > On 14/07/09 at 09:47 +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > > On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > > >
> > > > What's the status on
Processing commands for cont...@bugs.debian.org:
> tags 365349 + patch
Bug#365349: Add support for creating a "debuginfo" package
There were no tags set.
Bug#492676: linux-2.6: should be compatible with systemtap
Tags added: patch
> thanks
Stopping processing here.
Please contac
On 14/07/09 at 20:56 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > In addition to systemtap, it should also make it easier to get crash
> > to work on released kernel images.
>
> systemtap is AFAIK a different problem.
Can you elaborate?
The requirements for systemtap on the kernel side are:
CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO
On 07/14/09 15:39, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 14/07/09 at 20:56 +0200, Bastian Blank wrote:
> > > In addition to systemtap, it should also make it easier to get crash
> > > to work on released kernel images.
> >
> > systemtap is AFAIK a different problem.
>
> Can you elaborate?
>
> The requireme
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:45:29AM -0600, dann frazier wrote:
> fwiw, I'd like to see these too. Coworkers of mine have patches to do
> this within kernel-package but, by the time we got the k-p maintainer
> to serious look at them, linux-2.6 was migrating away from k-p.
Are you able to outline th
On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 12:02:52PM -0400, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> On 14/07/09 at 09:47 +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> > On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > >
> > > What's the status on the addition of a "debuginfo" package in addition
> > > to linux-image-*? Is it just waiting on som
On 14/07/09 at 09:47 +0200, maximilian attems wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> >
> > What's the status on the addition of a "debuginfo" package in addition
> > to linux-image-*? Is it just waiting on someone to do the work, and is
> > it something that needs to be discussed fi
On Mon, 13 Jul 2009, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> What's the status on the addition of a "debuginfo" package in addition
> to linux-image-*? Is it just waiting on someone to do the work, and is
> it something that needs to be discussed first?
yep, nobody dedicated time yet to linux-debug flavour.
a
Hi,
What's the status on the addition of a "debuginfo" package in addition
to linux-image-*? Is it just waiting on someone to do the work, and is
it something that needs to be discussed first?
It kind of hurts to hear people saying "systemtap works on every major
distro -- just install the debugi
16 matches
Mail list logo
