On Wed, 2008-09-10 at 18:11 +0200, Bernd Schubert wrote: > > Why should you need to use module-assistent?
Just because it seems to be promoted as the "official" way to build kernel module packages. > All you need to do is to compile > Lustre and put the .ko files into a debian package? Indeed. m-a just seemed like a nice neat way to do that be immune from futurisms as any futurisms would presumably be incorporated into m-a. Basically it's just a case of trying to use "official interfaces". > I don't know if it is really important, since there is already a debian way > to > create packages. Actually in Lenny all packages are included and only the > kernel modules have to be build, but even that can be easily done > by "aptitude install lustre-source". Yeah, this is all great for users. It doesn't help developers though, with a lustre source code pool that needs to build and test packages. > Well o.k., I see your point when it comes to build a new lustre > version, which is not in -stable yet. That too. > But for that there is always the > possibility to backport the stuff from Debian Sid (unstable). > All of this applies to Ubuntu as well. None of it covers the developer's workflow to getting to something reasonable to include in a (i.e. backports) repository though. > Patrick, Goswin and I certainly can help you (Patrick and Goswin have by far > more experience to create clean packages than I have). Any contributions will be most welcome. b.
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Lustre-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lustre.org/mailman/listinfo/lustre-discuss
