Follow-up - kernel.src Issue

[Paul Howarth]

David Cary Hart wrote:
> To avoid confusion:
> 
> YES. I am FULLY aware that Fedora no longer provides kernel-source.rpm.
> That is NOT what I am looking for.
> 
> This question now pertains to kernel-2.6.11-1.1170_FC4.src.rpm. Note, I
> am referring to kernel-2.6.11-1.1170_FC4.SRC.rpm. I had originally
> posted regarding kernel-2.6.11-1.1166_FC4.src.rpm.
> 
> Up to now, we have been able to create kernel-source.rpm from src.rpm.
> That is - seemingly - NO LONGER POSSIBLE. %buildsrc and the routines it
> referred to in the 2.6.10 series are no longer included in the spec
> file.
> 
> If Fedora now intends to resume distributing kernel-source then this is
> a non-issue. However, that has not been the case with the two 2.6.11
> rawhide releases.
> 
> Correct me if I am wrong but this new format allows for creating a
> custom FC kernel only by text editing the config files which (IMO) is a
> VERY bad idea. Without "make config" it is possible to select
> conflicting options or to omit dependent options.
> 
> Can I get an "official" comment - please?

Not an "official" comment, but the method described at:
http://crab-lab.zool.ohiou.edu/kevin/kernel-compilation-tutorial-en/steps.html
uses "make menuconfig" (or your favourite GUI version) and does not 
require the creation of a kernel-source package, nor hand-editing of the 
config files. This does appear to be the "official" way of building 
kernels, and results in an RPM too, which is good, isn't it?

Paul.