On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 05:42:31PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Tzafrir Cohen wrote: > >A number of other issues: > > > >usually when you install a new kernel that you built you keep the old > >one for a while. At least until you see it boot. Thus it might be useful > >to think about installing a number of them side-by-side. > > That's another reason why make-kpkg is nice - these days I find myself > compiling 2.6testX kernels twice a week and sometimes multiple times a > day (I try to help people shoot the problems I reported on LKML), and > it's nice to keep track of what's going on through dpkg.
Note that unlike debs, building an rpm is running a script and not running a makefile. No easy shortcuts in case of a compilation problem, but the result is more reproducable. [ snip ] > So what's the bottom line of all this? That "make rpm" in the vanilla > kernels is not useful enough? It is. At least if you don't hit anything else. If you hit that error message you are already provided with a workaround. One other thing I forgot to mention: Should be relevant to 2.4 and not to 2.6, as the config system has be rewritten in a sane way (right?): Even after you run 'make xconfig' or 'make menuconfig' run 'make oldconfig' to make sure 'make oldconfig' requires no input. Those three don't seem to be exactly in sync. -- Tzafrir Cohen +---------------------------+ http://www.technion.ac.il/~tzafrir/ |vim is a mutt's best friend| mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] +---------------------------+ ================================================================= To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
