If we modified the config files to do what you wanted, it would spew
hundreds of warnings.
If hundreds of options have been ignored, then yes - I have no problem
with that (contrary to what you may be thinking).
The way the Fedora config files work is that they
are mashed together and the
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 07:16:33PM +, Mr Dash Four wrote:
Executing make oldconfig does not change that! DRM_NOVEAU group of
options are vital as they compile the driver for my video card and
if this is missing I am getting the VGA-style bootup screen and
everything is a mess - all this
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:03:04PM +, Mr Dash Four wrote:
Don Zickus wrote:
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 07:16:33PM +, Mr Dash Four wrote:
Executing make oldconfig does not change that! DRM_NOVEAU group of
options are vital as they compile the driver for my video card and
if this is
On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 08:38:32PM +, Mr Dash Four wrote:
Oh, I suck, I searched for DRM_NOVEAU instead of DRM_NOUVEAU.
I did exactly the same as you as my French is really crap!
Jarod figured it out. For some reason CONFIG_STAGING needs to be set to
'y' for DRM_NOUVEU to be enabled
Ok. So using Jarod's patch he posted before and the config you attached
here, everything works fine for me.
Have you tried the .config I have attached at the first post on this
very thread and/or the subsequent variations I have posted since?
The problem is that even with the patch valid
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 07:21:29PM -0800, JD wrote:
On 01/06/2011 01:23 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 01:13:41PM -0800, JD wrote:
...
...
Would this loop in the spec file do it?
.
.
for i in %{all_arch_configs}
do
mv $i $i.tmp
./merge.pl
On 01/07/2011 11:15 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 01:36:59PM -0500, Jarod Wilson wrote:
I just implemented exactly what I described here locally, and it worked
perfectly. The config-local file needs to be a Source: file so that it
actually gets included in the source rpm, and
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 12:33:16PM -0800, JD wrote:
Every time I have tried to add an attachment, the server delays
delivery pending approval. I then get a message from list admin
saying my post was rejected, - no reason given.
There was one rejected post from you, because it had an
Hi Jarod.
I tried it and it failed miserably.
In fact, it does not overwrite the config values in the source tree with
the config values in config-local.
When it started building for my i686 platform,
I peeked into the .config file in the source tree.
It had ignored my settings
On 01/07/2011 09:21 PM, JD wrote:
On 01/07/2011 02:45 PM, JD wrote:
On 01/07/2011 11:15 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 01:36:59PM -0500, Jarod Wilson wrote:
I just implemented exactly what I described here locally, and it
worked
perfectly. The config-local file needs to be a
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 12:15:51AM -0500, Don Zickus wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 11:47:41PM -0500, Jarod Wilson wrote:
So, what do I do? I simply prep from source
(rpmbuild -bp kernel.spec)
and then cd to ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-2.6.35.10-74/linux-2.6.35.i686,
copy my current
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 10:18:42AM -0500, Jarod Wilson wrote:
We could probably mimic the old linux-kernel-test.patch which was a stub
patch to allow developers to quickly test their patches without mucking
with the spec file, but instead for config files (like the %rhel thing).
I think
On 01/06/2011 07:12 AM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 09:21:16PM -0800, JD wrote:
On 01/05/2011 08:47 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
From the kernel spec:
# Dynamically generate kernel .config files from config-* files
make -f %{SOURCE20} VERSION=%{version} configs
And Source20 is
On 01/06/2011 07:18 AM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 12:15:51AM -0500, Don Zickus wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 11:47:41PM -0500, Jarod Wilson wrote:
So, what do I do? I simply prep from source
(rpmbuild -bp kernel.spec)
and then cd to
On 01/06/2011 12:45 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 10:53:24AM -0800, JD wrote:
as a base config file (such as ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/config-x86-generic
(my arch is i686), when building from a new source rpm release.
It never yielded a kernel with my drivers enabled.
Try
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 01:13:41PM -0800, JD wrote:
...
I think this would suffice:
# This file is empty in stock builds, but can be populated with local
# config option overrides for custom local builds
Source1000: config-local
Then, in %prep, in a loop similar to the if rhel one:
On 01/06/2011 01:23 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 01:13:41PM -0800, JD wrote:
...
I think this would suffice:
# This file is empty in stock builds, but can be populated with local
# config option overrides for custom local builds
Source1000: config-local
Then, in %prep,
I added the loop as you suggest (without the if conditional)
just after the if rhel conditional's endif
I also added it after the loop within the debuginfo block.
It is building now. Will let you know.
I've also done the above, but what am I supposed to do with it?! Do I
just run make
What I did, is described below.
However, it did not work. rpmbuild exited with error.
The output file kernel.build,out is attached.
Strange error that!
After you do make oldconfig, do these steps:
Do I copy my .34 config as .config first, prior to running make
oldconfig (so that I could
On 01/06/2011 04:42 PM, Mr Dash Four wrote:
What I did, is described below.
However, it did not work. rpmbuild exited with error.
The output file kernel.build,out is attached.
Strange error that!
After you do make oldconfig, do these steps:
Do I copy my .34 config as .config first, prior
On 01/06/2011 01:23 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 01:13:41PM -0800, JD wrote:
...
...
Would this loop in the spec file do it?
.
.
for i in %{all_arch_configs}
do
mv $i $i.tmp
./merge.pl %{Source1000} $i.tmp $i
rm $i.tmp
done
Yep. In
Well, our good advisor did not indicate that I need to use
the absolute pathname for the config-local :)
Will retry.
Thanx for the good observation.
I can't believe I haven't thought of this earlier!!! It has been staring
me in the face all this time!
Here it is - the solution to *my*
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 11:36:40PM +, Mr Dash Four wrote:
vi .config (this is to add the magic # x86_64 at the top)
I don't understand why you need a commented line???
What's the magic about it? A comment is ignored.
See the Fedora Wiki ( :-D ) for building the kernel - the target
On 01/05/2011 06:29 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 11:36:40PM +, Mr Dash Four wrote:
vi .config (this is to add the magic # x86_64 at the top)
I don't understand why you need a commented line???
What's the magic about it? A comment is ignored.
See the Fedora Wiki ( :-D )
On Thu, Jan 06, 2011 at 04:14:08AM +, Mr Dash Four wrote:
See the Fedora Wiki ( :-D ) for building the kernel - the
target arch needs to be added as a comment on the first line of
that .config file (that is particularly important if I do
cross-compilation of the kernel - I add # i386 for
Anyway, patches welcome, if you think it is worth fixing.
I'll gladly provide you with one - as soon as I get my other big
problems with the .34 to .35 migration sorted (I am not all than keen on
entering the values or merging them manually as you can imagine) I'll
enclose a patch in this
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 07:53:38PM -0800, JD wrote:
Thank you for the elucidation, Don. I find it very useful,
as I have struggled with this issue for a long time.
So, for a sysadmin, who needs a custom configured kernel
for multiple machines, and wants to produce the custom
binaries for
On Wed, Jan 05, 2011 at 11:47:41PM -0500, Jarod Wilson wrote:
So, what do I do? I simply prep from source
(rpmbuild -bp kernel.spec)
and then cd to ~/rpmbuild/BUILD/kernel-2.6.35.10-74/linux-2.6.35.i686,
copy my current kernel's config file to .config, run
make oldconfig and
male all
On Jan 4, 2011, at 6:42 PM, Mr Dash Four wrote:
I have been trying to compile and run the above kernel (upgrading from
2.6.34.7-66) for the past 3 days - all to no avail!
rpmbuild --rebuild kernel-2.6.35.10-74.fc14.src.rpm works just fine here,
and in the Fedora build system. You're Doing It
The Fedora kernel team doesn't have the resources to support every random
user with a
random kernel config of the week. The Fedora kernel team does however
support the official Fedora kernels built in the Fedora build system and
released via the Fedora updates yum repo.
Thank you for
30 matches
Mail list logo
