future kernel module rpm situation (was: kernel-source vs. kernel-sourcecode (please revert))

[Axel Thimm]

On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 10:22:21AM -0400, Charles R. Anderson wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 04:15:45PM +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > Say you have neither a running nor an installed kernel, only the
> > neccessary build tools captured in a chroot waiting to build kernel
> > modules. Please no dependecies on having the kernel installed and even
> 
> Why is it bad to BuildRequires: kernel-suchandsuch ?  You don't unpack
> some glibc sources into a chroot waiting to build userspace programs,
> do you?  No, you install glibc-devel...  So I don't see the problem 
> with installing the kernel you are going to build against.
> 
> > running. These requirements are far too strict, and unneccessary as
> > past and current practice demonstrates. They may be adequate for
> > someone building for his own few kernels, but not for producing
> > several kernel module rpms in a row.
> 
> Can you not install several kernels in the chroot at once?

Not for different arch with non-distinguishable names and versions,
e.g. not for i686 and athlon in one chroot.

But that is not the problem, one could sequentialize this and in fact
it already is done so.

But installing kernels into chroots with all required dependencies for
building a small kernel module rpm is quite some overshoot.

What I am currently doing is keep copies of prepared kernel sources
per arch and flavour in a separate folder hierarchy and building
against these. This speeds up kernel module building considerably (no
mrproper/oldconfig/dep/prepare etc. steps), but is quite non-portable
across machines.

It would be perfect, if Arjan's kernel would produce
"kernel-devel" packages containing saved headers only. That
would ease external kernel module rpm building enormously, e.g. kernel
module rpms would only have to
BuildRequires: kernel-devel

It is a bit more involved, as you have to think about flavours and
archs, but that's the principle.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20040615/55dde62a/attachment.sig>