On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Stephen Powell <zlinux...@wowway.com> wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 13:56:35 -0400 (EDT), Tom H wrote:
>>
>> CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=$(getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN)
>> although "getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN" on an atom's probably "1"; but
>> you never know...
>>
>> You can also pass "INSTALL_MOD_STRIP=1" to make-kpkg so that the "make
>> modules_install" step strips out debugging information (if this isn't
>> done by default).
>
> Thanks for the tips, Tom! I believe I'll incorporate one or both of
> those tips during the next revision of my kernel-building web page.
You're very welcome. Should kernel-package ever be EOLd you could look
into the "fakeroot debian/rules..." way of compiling a kernel that
both the Debian and Ubuntu kernel teams seem to be promoting if you
use their sources. From what little I've read about this method, it
doesn't seem to have the equivalent of make-kpg's "kernel_image"
target so it might have the same deficiency as "make deb-pkg" from
your perspective...
I was re-reading the make-kpkg to see whether there were targets with
or without debugging symbols and found "kernel_debug":
kernel_debug
This target produces a Debian package containing the debugging
symbols for the modules contained in the corresponding image
package. The basic idea here is to keep the space in /lib/mod-
ules/<kver> under control, since this could be on a root parti-
tion with space restrictions.
So, if you create a linux-image package with debug info stripped out,
you can later create a package with just the unstripped modules rather
than recompile a complete package. The man page doesn't specify where
these modules would be installed.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=swyo0xv8qoss_rzasytauho064v0mf93p8m+p_axum...@mail.gmail.com
