arch-in-uname tweaks (was: rpms/kernel/devel...)

[Jarod Wilson]

On Wednesday 26 March 2008 09:19:56 am Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
[...]
> >> Just wondering: If we are working in this area why not finally chose one
> >> of the two variants ("%{KVERREL}-$Flavour" or "%{KVERREL}$Flavour") and
> >> stick to it everywhere as well? Or even use a "." as delimiter here as
> >> well?
> >> Then the duplication due to the "if [ -n "$Flavour" ]" could be removed
> >> in this area of the spec file by using something like this everywhere:
> >> DevelDir=/usr/src/kernels/%{KVERREL}${Flavour:+-${Flavour}}
> >
> > I thought about trying to yank that extra symlink and the if clause, but
> > wasn't sure exactly what they were there for, so I didn't want to cause
> > any further breakage...
>
> Understood.
>
> > But yeah, I'd be all for simplifying there, if its not
> > going to cause someone/something headaches.
>
> +1 -- let's remove it and see what breaks; we can easily re-add later if
> it's needed somewhere
>
> > To be consistent with the rest of
> > the paths laid down, it really should be %{KVERREL}${Flavour} without any
> > "-" or "."
>
> +1
>
> > (unless we also change all the other paths to also use "-" or ".".)
>
> Hmmm. This would look cleaner IMHO. But it likely would create even more
> trouble for kmods and other kernel module stuff. But as there are
> adjustments needed already due to the other changes it might be a good
> idea to do this change now as well.
>
> But I'm not really sure if that's really worth the effort.

I'm trying out a local build now that eliminates the DevelLink and uses your 
suggestion above for DevelDir, and makes use of %{KVERREL}-%{Flavour} right 
now, which as discussed on irc, looks more correct to both of us. :)

i.e., this changes uname -r for kernel-PAE from 2.6.25-1.fc9.i686PAE to 
2.6.25-1.fc9.i686-PAE, and all paths laid down are changed accordingly.


-- 
Jarod Wilson
jwilson at redhat.com