* Russ Allbery <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-12-26 16:17:04]: > Sam Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > So, I agree that we definitely need to support building targeted at > > /usr/lib/uml. I also believe you need to set up the other way. > > Ah, now I understand your concerns. > > How about this: What if having ARCH set to uml changed the sysname, the > build infrastructure, the package name, and the recommended kernel image, > and one had to set a separate variable (DEBIAN_UML_PATHS, perhaps) to have > the kernel module install in /usr/lib/modules? That would let one put the > kernel modules in the same place as the Debian package if desired, with a > bit of additional hassle, while having other builds produce packages that > behave like other module packages and could be installed in the guest OS. > > If that sounds fine, I can implement that.
this, too comes down to the fact that uml needs some support to build modules (and perhaps other stuff). the most natural and really needed thing is an active maintainer who creates this infrastructure in a sensible way. not us coming up with a solution that seems to fit our gusto. i will start lobbing/searching for a new more active maintainer. /andreas
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
