On Sat, Jun 07, 2008 at 09:35:28PM +0000, Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > Taken to another system?
I don't remember if I did or not. > The problems I remember: > > 1. the "source" and "build" links pointed to an incorrect place. An > invalid build link is a problem. Where do they point? > 2. If I actually changed the source to make the base supplied > linux-headers package not good enough, I found no way to generate a > complete one (linux-headers-2.6.18-6 vs linux-headers-2.6.18-6-686). So running make-kpkg binary-arch, doesn't build a useful kernel and header package set? > Doesn't work well if you want to allow building stuff on other > computers :-( > > This is to say that I got spolit by how well 'm-a a-i' works. Well I must admit I don't build custom kernels for my main computers. I only do so far a router I work with at work, and that one I do by patching and changing the source package since I run it through a mini build server. You should not need the linux-headers-2.6.18-6 when using make-kpkg as far as I can tell, although perhaps make-kpkg isn't always doing the right thing when building from source. Not sure about that. -- Len Sorensen -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]