On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:39:14PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 10:34:24PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > Oddly enough, I now *start* to see his point. BTW, I have neither the time > > (p100 with 48meg? multiple kernel builds, each time you build the package, > > and that's bound to be a few, because of testing?) or the space (multiple > > kernel trees, multiple kernel compiles, on 3.3gig?) to really do this, but > > I'll try anyway. > > Hmm, well since you were talking about kernel-headers, you don't have to > build any kernels. Besides, if you start off with the current kerne-image > source package, you'll see that it uses cp -l so it won't take up much more > space than one kernel source would. > > Just change the rules to not call make-kpkg build and make-kpkg kernel-image > and you're set.
I'll do this. Now I'm off to make this patch of yours. Which I'm doing, because you're the best package maintainer in the world. Wait, huh? Now *there's* a logic flaw. And I'm definitely doing it. So I can see which side of the argument's right. -- Daniel Stone Linux Kernel Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK----- Version: 3.1 G!>CS d s++:- a---- C++ ULS++++$>B P---- L+++>++++ E+(joe)>+++ W++ N->++ !o K? w++(--) O---- M- V-- PS+++ PE- Y PGP>++ t--- 5-- X- R- tv-(!) b+++ DI+++ D+ G e->++ h!(+) r+(%) y? UF++ ------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------