On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:18:39 -0400, H S <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > Apparently, _Tim Kelley_, on 04/05/05 07:29,typed: >> On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 01:05:01AM +0300, Andres J?rv wrote: >> >>> I'm missing the point of make-kpkg. It doesn't make any other >>> difference than make things more complicated IMHO. I just use the >>> old fashion way of cp and make modules_install ;) >> >> >> ? It doesn't take any longer, and you get version tracking and a >> nice deb. Seems like a no brainer to me. It's much more convenient >> than cp and editing your bootloader files ... >>
> So how do you tell make-kpkg to not clean everything for a > recompilation of a same version kernel with only a tiny change in > the config file? Are you sure that tine change shall be propagated to the kernel that shall be built? > Reberto has mentioned 'do_clean := NO' method. Have you ever used > it? If not, what you do you use to avoid unnecessary recompilations > during tweaking of the config file? No, that won't do it. The do_clean := NO ensures that the tree is not cleaned _after_ the .deb is built. manoj -- No directory. Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/> 1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]