On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 05:06 +0100, Jeroen van Wolffelaar wrote: > Package: oprofile-source > Severity: serious > > The way this package is built is not accepteble. Please fix the build > system to something that works with just dpkg-buildpackage.
I'm a little puzzled. The package 'oprofile-source' does build from source using dpkg-buildpackage. I just now built a brand new sid chroot for i386, and ran 'dpkg-buildpackage' without a problem (after adding build-essential and the build-deps). Perhaps it is not clear from the description, but this package is only supposed to provide the _source_ needed to build an oprofile kernel module for 2.4.x kernels. It is not supposed to provide the modules themselves. Hence, I build the module packages personally and upload them as a convenience for using, using the source provided in 'oprofile-source.' Is it this module building part that you're suggesting I automate? If it is, that's fine -- I just want to make sure I understand what part is unacceptable. If there's a better way to do this, let me know. This is the method that my AM and I settled on when I applied to become a DD. The problem is that the oprofile module was not accepted into the upstream Linux kernel source until 2.6. Note that this is not an issue for 2.6.x kernels where the kernel image packages contain an oprofile module by default. > --Jeroen > > ----- Forwarded message from Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> ----- > > Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2005 12:41:43 +0100 > From: Martin Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Explanation > > Michael Banck: > > The package builds fine like that, it's just the additional kernel > modules which need to be built by a different script, AIUI > > Steve Langasek: > > well, here's the thing. the source package does build if you run > the normal debian/rules commands; but those binary packages that are > built do *not* include the kernel-specific modules packages. So you > have to go through an additional step to build the per-kernel module > packages, which are not listed in debian/control but are present in > the archive. > > me: > > We cannot support this security-wise. > > Apart from that the package apparently fails to build from source > (FTBFS) if > > make -f debian/rules build > sudo make -f debian/rules binary > > doesn't produce all required binary packages that should end up in > the archive. > > > This is surely release-critical. > > > Regards, > > Joey > > ----- End forwarded message ----- > -- Ciao, al ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Al Stone Alter Ego: Linux & Open Source Lab Debian Developer Hewlett-Packard Company http://www.debian.org E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
