Re: shared /boot support. bz 197065
On 24.03.2008 20:53, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Monday 24 March 2008 03:32:37 pm Dave Jones wrote:
I took a stab at bz 197065 and arrived at the patch below.
Would appreciate some eyeballs before I commit from people
familiar with the macro goo in the specfile. (Hi Roland!)
Aparently pm-utils will need a change to cope with the changed
filename, but I think that should be the limit of the damage.
(oprofile will need to append the archname on the end of System.map-$ver
filenames, but they're user-passed anyway, and not coded anywhere afaik
Hmm. Not sure about Systemtap).
Comments?
Yep!
-install -m 644 .config $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/config-$KernelVer
-install -m 644 System.map $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/System.map-$KernelVer
-touch $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/initrd-$KernelVer.img
+install -m 644 .config $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/config-$KernelVer.%{_arch}
+install -m 644 System.map
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/System.map-$KernelVer.%{_arch}
+touch $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/initrd-$KernelVer.img.%{_arch}
For the sake of consistency, [...]
For the sake of consistency we IMHO should use the same delimiter
between $(uname -r) and arch in all places. E.g. either . (like
quoted above) everywhere or a -, like we already use in the devel
packages (e.g. /usr/src/kernels/2.6.25-0.141.rc6.git5.fc9-x86_64).
CU
knurd
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
I want to ask Second Notice From Alpha Financial
Hii.., Nice to know you..My name is Johansen Silalahi.I come from Indonesia..I have message from Alpha Financial U.K. about second Notice..The Text same with your email..I am received from Mr.Mr.Donnvan Housen.Director,Alpha Financial Consult. London, U.K.The message same with you..According to you, is it true?that we received money from them?.The total sum of £6,000,000.00 GBP (Six Million British Pounds)..Do you trust it?By the way..What is your nationality?Thank you..God Bless..My email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Your Sincerely, Johansen Silalahi,S.Hut - Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: shared /boot support. bz 197065
On Tuesday 25 March 2008 02:02:04 am Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 24.03.2008 20:53, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Monday 24 March 2008 03:32:37 pm Dave Jones wrote:
I took a stab at bz 197065 and arrived at the patch below.
Would appreciate some eyeballs before I commit from people
familiar with the macro goo in the specfile. (Hi Roland!)
[...]
-install -m 644 .config $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/config-$KernelVer
-install -m 644 System.map
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/System.map-$KernelVer -touch
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/initrd-$KernelVer.img
+install -m 644 .config
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/config-$KernelVer.%{_arch} +install -m 644
System.map $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/System.map-$KernelVer.%{_arch} +
touch $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/initrd-$KernelVer.img.%{_arch}
For the sake of consistency, [...]
For the sake of consistency we IMHO should use the same delimiter
between $(uname -r) and arch in all places. E.g. either . (like
quoted above) everywhere or a -, like we already use in the devel
packages (e.g. /usr/src/kernels/2.6.25-0.141.rc6.git5.fc9-x86_64).
One thing I like about using . over - is that you'd get
2.6.25-xzy.fc9.x86_64 for uname -r output, which matches up nicely with what
rpm -q outputs, now that we're defaulting to outputting n-v-r.arch.
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: shared /boot support. bz 197065
On 25.03.2008 13:47, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Tuesday 25 March 2008 02:02:04 am Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 24.03.2008 20:53, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Monday 24 March 2008 03:32:37 pm Dave Jones wrote:
I took a stab at bz 197065 and arrived at the patch below.
Would appreciate some eyeballs before I commit from people
familiar with the macro goo in the specfile. (Hi Roland!)
[...]
-install -m 644 .config $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/config-$KernelVer
-install -m 644 System.map
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/System.map-$KernelVer -touch
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/initrd-$KernelVer.img
+install -m 644 .config
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/config-$KernelVer.%{_arch} +install -m 644
System.map $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/System.map-$KernelVer.%{_arch} +
touch $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/initrd-$KernelVer.img.%{_arch}
For the sake of consistency, [...]
For the sake of consistency we IMHO should use the same delimiter
between $(uname -r) and arch in all places. E.g. either . (like
quoted above) everywhere or a -, like we already use in the devel
packages (e.g. /usr/src/kernels/2.6.25-0.141.rc6.git5.fc9-x86_64).
One thing I like about using . over - is that you'd get
2.6.25-xzy.fc9.x86_64 for uname -r output, which matches up nicely with what
rpm -q outputs, now that we're defaulting to outputting n-v-r.arch.
Sounds good. Or, IOW: I'm fine with using . as delimiter, if we use it
for the directories found in the devel packages as well.
This whole idea of course means that there are some adjustments needed
for kmods in livna (or other kernel module packaging schemes). That
shouldn't be to hard; doing it for F9 might be a bit late, but if you
guys really want to go that route I'm sure we'll find a way to deal with
it before F9 ships.
CU
knurd
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: OT - High amount of spam on this list
Rui Tiago Cação Matos wrote: Hi, Is it just me that is receiving a lot of spam on this list? Other fedora lists I'm subscribed to don't seem to suffer from this. Can anyone have a look at it? No its actually going to the whole list, I get it too and they are in the archive if you go look for them. I'm on 4 redhat lists and this is the only one I get spam on though, and it comes from various people so its not just one compromised machine. I only see one spam message every couple days, so its not really that bad, but less spam is always a good thing. -- Andrew Farris [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.lordmorgul.net gpg 0xC99B1DF3 fingerprint CDEC 6FAD BA27 40DF 707E A2E0 F0F6 E622 C99B 1DF3 No one now has, and no one will ever again get, the big picture. - Daniel Geer ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: shared /boot support. bz 197065
On Tuesday 25 March 2008 12:54:07 pm Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Tuesday 25 March 2008 12:49:28 pm Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Tuesday 25 March 2008 08:58:00 am Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 25.03.2008 13:47, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Tuesday 25 March 2008 02:02:04 am Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 24.03.2008 20:53, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Monday 24 March 2008 03:32:37 pm Dave Jones wrote:
I took a stab at bz 197065 and arrived at the patch below.
Would appreciate some eyeballs before I commit from people
familiar with the macro goo in the specfile. (Hi Roland!)
[...]
Test build up and running:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] x86_64]# ls /boot/*.x86_64*
/boot/config-2.6.25-0.152.rc6.git7.fc9.x86_64
/boot/initrd-2.6.25-0.152.rc6.git7.fc9.x86_64.img
/boot/System.map-2.6.25-0.152.rc6.git7.fc9.x86_64
/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.25-0.152.rc6.git7.fc9.x86_64
[EMAIL PROTECTED] x86_64]# uname -r
2.6.25-0.152.rc6.git7.fc9.x86_64
[EMAIL PROTECTED] x86_64]# ls /lib/modules/
2.6.25-0.152.rc6.git7.fc9.x86_64
[EMAIL PROTECTED] x86_64]# ls /usr/src/kernels/
2.6.25-0.152.rc6.git7.fc9.x86_64
And here's the patch I came up with for the above:
Crap, disregard that version. Things blow up on flavo{,u}red builds, because
the flavo{,u}r gets inserted between the f9 and .arch instead of after arch
(the ppc64 build blew up on kdump bits). So a teeny bit more spec hackage
required, but its still doable.
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: OT - High amount of spam on this list
On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 12:18:38PM -0700, Andrew Farris wrote: Rui Tiago Cação Matos wrote: Hi, Is it just me that is receiving a lot of spam on this list? Other fedora lists I'm subscribed to don't seem to suffer from this. Can anyone have a look at it? No its actually going to the whole list, I get it too and they are in the archive if you go look for them. I'm on 4 redhat lists and this is the only one I get spam on though, and it comes from various people so its not just one compromised machine. I only see one spam message every couple days, so its not really that bad, but less spam is always a good thing. I've not seen anything make to to my inbox from the list that hasn't been caught by spamassassin. The posting rules to the list aren't as restricted as they are to other lists, as it's already been really useful to Cc: upstream developers (who aren't necessarily on the list) into discussions here, without having to go approve messages for every post. I just added some more taboo subjects to the mailman filter, so that might catch some of those that are slipping through. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
