Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 09 2008, Frank Küster wrote: > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Debian Bug Tracking System) wrote: > >>> There is not point keeping this report open > >> There is. > > Err, I don't see the point. > >>>; the official kernel >>> team produces headers that do not work with kernel-package. >> >> Then this is a bug in kernel-package. > > Heck no. If the official kernels, which do not use > kernel-package, produce header packages that are not usable with a > package that predates their effort, how is it a bug in kernel-package?
This is how I argue: - I want to use a Debian kernel, and I will recommend that to any newbie, because AFAIK the upstream kernel developers do just that: Rely on distributions to provide stable kernels. - I want to use add-on modules not included in the kernel, and others will want the same. - I was looking for programs that would allow me to create modules "the Debian way". kernel-package advertises itself as A utility for building Linux kernel related Debian packages. It doesn't mention modules in the long description, but it does so in the installed documentation. - I find out that it is not possible to build add-on modules for Debian kernels with kernel-package. - I think that it would be useful for any kernel-related package on Debian to work with Debian kernels and the headers provided by Debian. The fact that kernel-package does not do so is a bug, severity wishlist if you like. The fact that it does not document this is a bug of at least normal severity IMO. Can't you follow that reasoning? Where am I wrong? >> You're free to decide that you won't fix it, and not even document the >> fact. But it is still a bug, and I hope that you are at least willing >> to fix the clone, i.e. the missing documentation. If you tell me that >> you are, I'll be happy to provide a patch. > > I don't see why I have to report that a third party produced > header package is not compatible with kernel-package. Err, you call an official Debian kernel header package "third party" when you are dealing with packaging software for Debian? That sounds wrong to me. > I'll remove hints from the documentation that imply that there > could be link to the official kernels. That's not the problem. If I install a Debian package, the usual expectation is that it is integrated with Debian. The fact that it is not needs special documentation. If you're assuming that the fact that a Debian package is actually integrated with Debian needs special documentation (which should be removed if this is not the case), then I think you're wrong. Or I am still misunderstanding something about the way kernels are organized in Debian. But this would just mean that the documentation is missing elsewhere - so there is still a bug somewhere. Regards, Frank -- Frank Küster Debian Developer (TeXLive) ADFC Miltenberg B90/Grüne KV Miltenberg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
