Hi Bas! Thanks for your response. The approach you comment around maintaining the Linux Version is interesting. At LibreWRT we've discussed for a while around the best way to handle the alternative kernel inclusion. Your comment helps in clearly separating the LibreWRT stuff, which would help maintain this.
Other parts of the patch sent, deal with directory hierarchy & tarball naming convention differences between kernel.org and the Libre Linux site. To avoid dealing with these differences, we tried a second approach, which is also included in the patch: instead of downloading deblobed kernel sources, we could deblob the vanilla kernel sources as part of the build process, making use of the "deblobing scripts" [1] provided by Libre Linux. This approach requires the deblobing scripts to be downloaded at "run time" or be included in the sources, for example, under a new sub directory 'scripts/deblob/'. What do you think about this? It's fundamental for us to know the opinion of the OpenWRT people. Have a nice day, Antonio PS: I supposed there would be some issue with CC'ing mailing lists :-) So, those from LibreWRT who are not already subscribed to this list should do so in order to follow up this thread [1] http://www.fsfla.org/svn/fsfla/software/linux-libre/scripts/ 2010/7/20 Bas Mevissen <[email protected]> > > On Mon, 19 Jul 2010 13:49:19 -0300, Antonio Grassi <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > It would be great if some OpenWRT developer could review it and send > some > > feedback about the inclusion of this patch; probably there are things to > be > > solved or improved before inclusion, so it would be great to hear about > > that > > too. > > > > I'm not an OpenWRT developer. My feeling is that non-intrusive "libre" > patches might get accepted by OpenWRT. Then a seperate LibreWRT archive > isn't needed. > > Regarding the kernel version, I think we need to have a "vanilla" linux > kernel version and a libre one, but not written like > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_USE_LIBRE_KERNEL),) > LINUX_VERSION:=2.6.34.1-libre > else > LINUX_VERSION:=2.6.34.1 > endif > > in many makefiles as this makes them messy and grepping for the > LINUX_VERSION unclean. It does not scale well if you would like to add more > different kernel tastes. > > A cleaner solution could be to have something like: > > VANILLA_LINUX_VERSION:=2.6.34.1 > LIBRE_LINUX_VERSION:=2.6.34.1-libre # or even > LIBRE_LINUX_VERSION:=$(VANILLA_LINUX_VERSION)-$(LIBRE)$(LIBRE_VERSION) > > in the Makefiles where the VANILLA_LINUX_VERSION is maintained by OpenWRT > and LIBRE_LINUX_VERSION by LIBRE_POSTFIX LibreWRT. > > In kernel.mk, we can simply assign the proper kernel to KERNEL_VERSION > with something like: > > ifneq ($(CONFIG_USE_LIBRE_KERNEL),) > LINUX_VERSION:=LIBRE_LINUX_VERSION > else > LINUX_VERSION:=VANILLA_LINUX_VERSION > endif > # Fall back to vanilla > ifeq ($(LINUX_VERSION),) > LINUX_VERSION:=VANILLA_LINUX_VERSION > endif > > > > PS: I'm CC'ing the LibreWRT development list > > > I'm not a member of that list, so I cannot copy that list. > > Regards, > > -- > Bas. > _______________________________________________ > openwrt-devel mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel >
_______________________________________________ openwrt-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
