On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 12:21:42PM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 11:51:08AM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 17, 2004 at 09:31:06AM +0000, Colin Watson wrote: > > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2004 at 09:59:14PM +0100, Sven Luther wrote: > > > > Also, Colin said he would have a look at this this evening, so we will > > > > know tomorrow about it. > > > > > > OK, I built kernel-patch-2.4.25-powerpc without your postinst hack. > > > (Incidentally, this is just how it builds by default. If you want to > > > have a postinst hack, it *must* be in the source package or in a > > > > Yeah. I had been struggling with this stuff for more than 48 hours > > though, and also usually submit the patch to Manoj for inclusion in > > kernel-package. > > > > > build-dependency, not just a local change on your system, otherwise > > > people won't be able to rebuild it correctly. It would be very > > > embarrassing if a kernel security update broke d-i!) > > > > Well, as i usually build powerpc security kernels, ... > > You also make it more difficult for people like me to try to help. A > patch in debian/ that gets applied to the postinst after it's installed
Yeah, but will break as soon as kernel-package is updated, no ? So you gain some facility in the short run, for brokeness in the long run. Look at : http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=230251 For example. > would do fine if hacks are needed, although not all that robust against > kernel-package changes: maybe just keeping your own fork of > image.postinst in debian/ would be more sensible. That's logically what > you're doing anyway. Yeah. Getting ride of kernel-package would be more sensible though, at least until kernel-package gets fixed to work in our case (post sarge timeframe though, said Manoj). > > > It seems to install successfully: > > > > Ok, can you put them somewhere i can download them (i need the modules > > and the -chrp image) and i will give it a try. > > http://riva.ucam.org/~cjwatson/tmp/kernel-patch-2.4.25-powerpc/ > > (please be nice to that, it's behind ADSL ...) Ok downloading, will test, and if it is ok, i will prepare a new version. > > > Setting up kernel-image-2.4.25-powerpc-pmac (2.4.25-2) ... > > > depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in > > > /lib/modules/2.4.25-powerpc/kernel/drivers/sound/kahlua.o > > > /boot/vmlinux does not exist. Installing from scratch, eh? > > > Or maybe you don't want a symbolic link here. Hmm? Lets See. > > > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/tmp# ls -l /boot/vmlinux > > > lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 22 Mar 17 09:11 /boot/vmlinux -> > > > vmlinux-2.4.25-powerpc > > > > > > Can you clarify the problem with leaving the symlink code in? I don't > > > seem to be seeing it. If I can reproduce it then I stand more chance of > > > fixing it. > > > > This is in a d-i chroot ? > > Yes. > > Is the changelog for kernel-package 8.083 relevant here? > > * Bug fix: "kernel-package: silent_modules should be YES on powerpc even > on first install of official images.", thanks to Sven > Luther. Accomodate the official powerpc kernel images to not prompt > even on initial install when /lib/modules/$version/ already > exists. This allows the separation of the modules from the kernel > image, since different powerpc subarches all require different images, > but can share the modules. (Closes: #230251). Yeah, it might, not entirely sure though, will check. > > > This image puts the symlink in /boot/vmlinux. I think just /vmlinux > > > > No, i think not. It is often the case that /boot and / are not on the > > same partition, especially as some OF seem not to be able to boot from > > ext3/whatever file systems you use for /. > > Hmm. Yes, I forgot that yaboot doesn't look this up when you run ybin in > the sort of way lilo does. How does grub handle this? No idea really, i use my own build kernels on x86, and use the real kernel name, so ... > > > would be better, since that's what kernel-package does by default so > > > it'll be more compatible with people's locally-built kernels: my > > > locally-built kernels have been using /vmlinux without me giving any > > > special directions. However, if it stays as /boot/vmlinux then > > > yaboot-installer needs to be told about it. > > > > Do you know what filesystems yaboot is able to boot from. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~/src/packages/yaboot/yaboot-1.3.11/second]$ ls fs_* > fs_ext2.c fs_iso.c fs_of.c fs_reiserfs.c fs_xfs.c Ok. do you know if fs_ext2 supports also ext3 filesystems not cleanly unmounted ? > (fs_of.c says "OpenFirmware supported filesystems".) > > > Also remember that not everyone uses yaboot. What about quik for > > example ? > > The fact that other boot loader installers may have to be changed to > have kernel symlinks in /boot doesn't alter the fact that > yaboot-installer has to be changed. :) > > We don't have a quik-installer, anyway ... We should though. > > > > I think maybe it would be more interesting to fix yaboot-installer > > > > instead so it doesn't rely on the symlink being present, but fall back > > > > to using the real kernel in case the symlink is missing, this would > > > > add more robustness to the whole process. > > > > > > I'm not keen on that idea. The resulting system wouldn't be upgradeable > > > as smoothly if its yaboot.conf hardcoded the kernel-image version rather > > > than using the symlink, which would be an unexpected kick in the teeth > > > for people doing kernel security updates. > > > > Well, you could naturally have kernel-image postinst upgrade that file, > > as i guess it is done on native grub/lilo systems on x86. Not sure > > though. > > No, it's not. lilo.conf uses /vmlinuz and is not altered by the > kernel-image postinst. grub is the same. Currently, yaboot works this > way too (although with /vmlinux rather than /vmlinuz, of course), and > it's excellent. > > I'm not aware of any architecture where the boot loader's configuration > file is rewritten at install time. It would be pretty ugly. > > > Anyway, current kernel-package is utterly broken with regard to powerpc, > > for example it doesn't know how to detect if you are on a old world or a > > new world machine, and thus if you need yaboot or quik. > > Right, it detects this at build-time rather than run-time, which is > wrong since the pmac kernels work on both (as I understand it). How come > there's no bug filed about this? because nobody cares, and kernel-package stuff is utterly broken on powerpc right now. > > What are the exact requirement of yaboot in this area ? > > What do you need beyond the above? No idea, which is why i am asking. Also keep in mind that yaboot also is used on IBM RS6K boxes. > > And as said, i would very much like to get ride of kernel-package, and > > do it by hand. > > Ugh. I don't think getting out of step with all the other architectures > is the way forward. Well, we have a kernel-module package, which should do all the module related postinst things, and a kernel-image which should set the kernel symlink. I don't really know we need all the rest of the complex stuff in kernel-package, and kernel-package is too complex to easily fix for me. I have been askind Manoj about this since i first took over the powerpc kernel package, and he said he won't do this until the post sarge time. So, i have been forced to do ugly workarounds. And i don't speak perl, but you are welcome to give a hand to fix this issue properly, if you feel like that. Also, kernel-package is not debconfized, so it will break in d-i on problematic cases. Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
