[SOLVED] Re: How to create a kernel package

[Hans]

Hi all,

thanks for pointing me to the wiki and the hint with the script. Yes, in the 
meantime things have changed, I was not aware of the bindep-pkg command.

I looked into the manual, but this specific command I did not find, but lots 
of very usefull other descriptions.

So, this little question of mine could be easily answered. Thank you for the 
quick answers!

Best regards

Hans

Re: How to create a kernel package

[Thomas Pircher]

Hans wrote:

I want to create a kernel package, which I can install with dpkg. There was a
command doing it instead of "make && make install", and I could not find it
any more. Last time I did it is a long time ago. Does someone know?


I also don't remember the old command, but this has been obsoleted by
the kernel itself, that has now a bindeb-pkg target.

So you'd do "make oldconfig bindeb-pkg" and you should end up with some
deb packages in the parent directory. If the build fails, you need to
install some -devel packages.

Then install the linux-image-*.deb package using dpkg -i.


Second question: My kernel sources are pointing with a symlink to /usr/src/
linux-5.10/, but by default there was a symlink to the headers, which is /usr/
src/linux-headers-5.10-*/.


No need to set up these links yourself, let the kernel development
package do that for you, if/when you install it.


For my understanding: When do I need this? I suppose, only when I want to
build modules, right?


Yes


Anything else to take notice of, i.e. adding a versionstring, so that I get
not in conflict with the debian repo packages?


You can set the CONFIG_LOCALVERSION in the kernel config file to add
some string to the kernel version, so it is unlikely to clash with the
upstream kernel version. It's useful to leave the Debian kernel
installed, in case your compiled kernel fails to boot.

FWIW, here is my script to build a kernel:


#!/bin/sh
set -e

prog_name=`basename $0`
concurrency=16
suffix=".`whoami`"

usage() {
echo "$prog_name [OPTIONS]"
}

help() {
usage
echo
echo "OPTIONS"
echo "  -h  show this help page"
echo "  -j  number of parallel make threads (default: $concurrency)"
echo "  -s  add suffix (default: $suffix)"
}


while getopts hj:s: opt; do
case "$opt" in
h)  help
exit 0;;
j)  concurrency="$OPTARG";;
s)  suffix="$OPTARG";;
\?) # unknown flag
usage >&2
exit 1;;
esac
done
shift `expr $OPTIND - 1`

if [ -n "$date" ]; then
echo >&2 "Extra argument"
exit 1
fi


sed -i -e 's/^#*\.*/CONFIG_LOCALVERSION="'"$suffix"'"/' 
.config
make -j "$concurrency" clean oldconfig savedefconfig bindeb-pkg
-

Thomas

Re: How to create a kernel package

[Georgi Naplatanov]

On 10/7/22 11:00, Hans wrote:

Hi folks,

some easy questions.

I want to create a kernel package, which I can install with dpkg. There was a
command doing it instead of "make && make install", and I could not find it
any more. Last time I did it is a long time ago. Does someone know?


Second question: My kernel sources are pointing with a symlink to /usr/src/
linux-5.10/, but by default there was a symlink to the headers, which is /usr/
src/linux-headers-5.10-*/.

For my understanding: When do I need this? I suppose, only when I want to
build modules, right?

Anything else to take notice of, i.e. adding a versionstring, so that I get
not in conflict with the debian repo packages?

Thanks for any hints.



Did you try steps from this Wiki page?

https://wiki.debian.org/BuildADebianKernelPackage

Kind regards
Georgi

How to create a kernel package

[Hans]

Hi folks,

some easy questions. 

I want to create a kernel package, which I can install with dpkg. There was a 
command doing it instead of "make && make install", and I could not find it 
any more. Last time I did it is a long time ago. Does someone know?


Second question: My kernel sources are pointing with a symlink to /usr/src/
linux-5.10/, but by default there was a symlink to the headers, which is /usr/
src/linux-headers-5.10-*/. 

For my understanding: When do I need this? I suppose, only when I want to 
build modules, right?

Anything else to take notice of, i.e. adding a versionstring, so that I get 
not in conflict with the debian repo packages?

Thanks for any hints.

Best regards

Hans


 

Re: Missing "kernel-package" in stretch

[Eduardo M KALINOWSKI]

On Ter, 20 Jun 2017, Karsten Wemheuer wrote:

thanks for Your answer. If I understand You correctly, the package
would not be available in "stretch". How should I build a custom kernel
in stretch without this package?


If you really want to use the package instead of the upstream make  
target, you can download the package in unstable and install it. Care  
must be taken when mixing distributions, but looking at the  
dependencies (https://packages.debian.org/sid/kernel-package) one can  
see that there are no specific versions required, and all the  
dependencies are for fairly common packages that one probably already  
has installed. This should make installation easy and shouldn't cause  
any problems.


--
Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
edua...@kalinowski.com.br

Re: Re: Re: Missing "kernel-package" in stretch

[Karsten Wemheuer]

Hi Darac,

thanks again. I wasn't aware of the new target "make deb-pkg".

Best regards,

Karsten

Re: Missing "kernel-package" in stretch

[Sven Joachim]

On 2017-06-20 11:26 +0100, Darac Marjal wrote:

> On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:05:01PM +0200, Karsten Wemheuer wrote:
>>Hi Darac,
>>
>>> It's a bug. The package tracker page for kernel-package
>>> <https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/kernel-package> states that 
>>> the package was removed from strech because the new version 
>>> introduced a new, serious-level bug: #848066. The bug was not fixed
>>> in time for the release, so the package was dropped (it's still in 
>>> unstable, though, so it may return for buster).
>>
>>thanks for Your answer. If I understand You correctly, the package
>>would not be available in "stretch". How should I build a custom kernel
>>in stretch without this package?
>
> The Debian Hanbook
> <https://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html#s-common-official>
> appears to recommend using upstream's tools. That is, the kernel now
> comes with a "make deb-pkg" target. 

In current kernels "make deb-pkg" also creates a source package which is
very time-consuming.  Unless one wants to distribute the built packages
(and thus has to think about GPL compliance), it's better to use
"make bindeb-pkg" which only creates binary packages.

Cheers,
   Sven

Re: Re: Missing "kernel-package" in stretch

[Darac Marjal]

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 12:05:01PM +0200, Karsten Wemheuer wrote:

Hi Darac,


It's a bug. The package tracker page for kernel-package
<https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/kernel-package> states that 
the package was removed from strech because the new version 
introduced a new, serious-level bug: #848066. The bug was not fixed
in time for the release, so the package was dropped (it's still in 
unstable, though, so it may return for buster).


thanks for Your answer. If I understand You correctly, the package
would not be available in "stretch". How should I build a custom kernel
in stretch without this package?


The Debian Hanbook
<https://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html#s-common-official>
appears to recommend using upstream's tools. That is, the kernel now
comes with a "make deb-pkg" target. 


--
For more information, please reread.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Re: Missing "kernel-package" in stretch

[Karsten Wemheuer]

Hi Darac,

> It's a bug. The package tracker page for kernel-package
> <https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/kernel-package> states that 
> the package was removed from strech because the new version 
> introduced a new, serious-level bug: #848066. The bug was not fixed
> in time for the release, so the package was dropped (it's still in 
> unstable, though, so it may return for buster).

thanks for Your answer. If I understand You correctly, the package
would not be available in "stretch". How should I build a custom kernel
in stretch without this package?

Thanks,

Karsten

Re: Missing "kernel-package" in stretch

[Darac Marjal]

On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:26:26AM +0200, Karsten Wemheuer wrote:

Hi *,

I just want to do some tests with kernels in "stretch" and therefore
was looking for packet "kernel-package".

But 
    apt install kernel-package
leads to 
    E: Package 'kernel-package' has no installation candidate

Is this a bug or is kernel building in stretch different to jessie?


It's a bug. The package tracker page for kernel-package
<https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/kernel-package> states that the package
was removed from strech because the new version introduced a new,
serious-level bug: #848066. The bug was not fixed in time for the
release, so the package was dropped (it's still in unstable, though, so
it may return for buster).



Thanks,

Karsten



--
For more information, please reread.


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Missing "kernel-package" in stretch

[Karsten Wemheuer]

Hi *,

I just want to do some tests with kernels in "stretch" and therefore
was looking for packet "kernel-package".

But 
    apt install kernel-package
leads to 
    E: Package 'kernel-package' has no installation candidate

Is this a bug or is kernel building in stretch different to jessie?

Thanks,

Karsten

For those of you having trouble with kernel-package and Linux V3 ...

[Stephen Powell]

For those of you having trouble with kernel-package and Linux Version 3,
I have an unofficial patch that may solve your problems, particularly if
you have CONFIG_LGUEST set in the kernel config file or you are trying
to build a headers package.  The patch is available here:
 
   http://users.wowway.com/~zlinuxman/kernel-package/linuxv3.diff
 
(Sorry, I realize that it is customary to include patches in-line in an
e-mail, but my MUA (Mail User Agent) has the nasty habit of inserting
line-feed characters in long lines, expanding tabs to blanks, etc., which
make it useless for posting in-line patches.)

This is an unofficial patch: it does not come from the upstream author
or the Debian package maintainer.  Use it at your own risk.  To apply,
 
   cd /usr/share/kernel-package
   ... (download the patch to the current directory)
   patch -p1 http://lists.debian.org/370191655.1161562.1312890777626.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com

how do patches get to Debian kernel package?

[Mark Copper]

Hi Debian users,

Upgrading from old stable (Lenny) to stable (Squeeze) broke X on my
machine.  The problem centers around the video chip on the Asus M2A-VM
motherboard, and, perhaps the attached Samsung monitor attached.

I am not certain, but I believe this discussion at lkml.org pertains:
   https://lkml.org/lkml/2011/6/21/244
where a kernel patch for the problem is proposed.

My question to this list is a request for a sketch of the process how
the patch discussed at lkml.org would get into Debian's kernel image
package.  Is there a resource where I can see whether the patch was
indeed accepted into the Linux kernel source?  What roughly, is
process to get from there to a compiled Debian package?

I'm sure it's all out there, but a few words from a knowledgeable
participant would be greatly appreciated.

Mark


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/cam-_jtm2ator426gy0xmcquntxbyxgzr27b5+bbzzjc6fx3...@mail.gmail.com

kernel-package: 2.6.37 kernelrelease target no longer works

[Cameron Hutchison]

I've built a new 2.6.37 kernel with kernel-package where I use an
"--append-to-version" option to add a hostname a build number.

Due to a change in the kernel Makefile, "make kernelrelease" no longer
gets the kernel release from include/config/kernel.release , but instead
uses scripts/setlocalversion . This causes problems because the extra
stuff added to EXTRAVERSION by --append-to-version is no longer there
when you run "make kernelrelease", so I get a bare kernel version
instead of my version.

The Linux Makefile change was made in commit 7b8ea53d.

I don't know whether this should be considered a bug in kernel-package
or the kernel. The kernel is no longer preserving the value of
EXTRAVERSION passed on the make command line when make is subsequently
invoked, whereas it previously did. But then, the kernel people don't
seem to care much about stable interfaces, so perhaps kernel-package
should adapt somehow.

What are people's thoughts?

For now, I'm going to revert 7b8ea53d in my tree so I can get VirtualBox
installing again (it compares $(uname -r) to $(make kernelrelease)), but
this should probably be fixed somewhere.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/f0a.4d34d5fb.9...@getafix.xdna.net

RE: make-kpkg (from kernel-package) does not build xen patched kernel

[Mike Viau]

Going to try a make-file patch when I get some time.

The patch was offered from a user on the Xen-user mailing list.

[1] http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-users/2010-09/msg00396.html


-M




> Subject: make-kpkg (from kernel-package) does not build xen patched kernel
> Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2010 16:16:31 -0400
>
> Hello list,
>
> I cannot get make-kpkg to build a Xenlinux type kernel into a Debian
> kernel binary on my Debian Squeeze x86_64 system.
>
> I am using GNU/Linux kernel sources tree (2.6.34.4) with Xen patches
> for this custom kernel. I am trying to use the make-kpkg command to
> build a working linux-image-2.6.34.4-xen-amd64 package for my system.
>
> The sources are vanilla (available from kernel.org) with patches
> available from:
> http://gentoo-xen-kernel.googlecode.com/files/xen-patches-2.6.34-4.tar.bz2
>
> These sources compile a Xenlinux kernel and not a pv_ops one so the bug
> report for XEN and the kernel-package is not applicable
> (http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=574957)
>
> It seems that when the kernel_image target is used, a
> System.map-2.6.34.4-xen can not be generated, and therefore a FATAL
> error causes the make-kpkg process to fail!
>
> A System.map-2.6.34.4-xen can be generated when the kernel is built and
> packaged into a Debian binary with make deb-pkg.
>
> Can anyone else reproduce this problem?
>
>
> uname -a
> Linux BUBBLE 2.6.34.4-r61-xen #1 SMP Tue Sep 14 10:39:11 EDT 2010
> x86_64 GNU/Linux
>
> apt-cache policy kernel-package
> kernel-package:
> Installed: 12.036
> Candidate: 12.036
> Version table:
> *** 12.036 0
> 500 http://mirror.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/debian/ squeeze/main
> amd64 Packages
> 100 /var/lib/dpkg/status
>
>
>
> -M
>
  

--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/bay148-w26797a860546be0560a52ef...@phx.gbl

make-kpkg (from kernel-package) does not build xen patched kernel

[Mike Viau]

Hello list,

I cannot get make-kpkg to build a Xenlinux type kernel into a Debian kernel 
binary on my Debian Squeeze x86_64 system.

I am using GNU/Linux kernel sources tree (2.6.34.4) with Xen patches for this 
custom kernel. I am trying to use the make-kpkg command to build a working 
linux-image-2.6.34.4-xen-amd64 package for my system.

The sources are vanilla (available from kernel.org) with patches available 
from: http://gentoo-xen-kernel.googlecode.com/files/xen-patches-2.6.34-4.tar.bz2

These sources compile a Xenlinux kernel and not a pv_ops one so the bug report 
for XEN and the kernel-package is not applicable 
(http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=574957)

It seems that when the kernel_image target is used, a System.map-2.6.34.4-xen 
can not be generated, and therefore a FATAL error causes the make-kpkg process 
to fail! 

A System.map-2.6.34.4-xen can be generated when the kernel is built and 
packaged into a Debian binary with make deb-pkg.

Can anyone else reproduce this problem?


uname -a
Linux BUBBLE 2.6.34.4-r61-xen #1 SMP Tue Sep 14 10:39:11 EDT 2010 x86_64 
GNU/Linux

apt-cache policy kernel-package
kernel-package:
  Installed: 12.036
  Candidate: 12.036
  Version table:
 *** 12.036 0
500 http://mirror.csclub.uwaterloo.ca/debian/ squeeze/main amd64 
Packages
100 /var/lib/dpkg/status



-M

  

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Florian Kulzer]

On Wed, Mar 31, 2010 at 05:01:03 +0100, Jen wrote:
> I am blind, so selecting the kernel from the grub prompt is not
> possible. I want to use the new kernel (not trunk) as my default.

OK, now I understand your problem. It is unfortunate that the trunk
version slipped into the normal repository and that update-grub is not
prepared to deal with it automatically now that you have a newer regular
kernel installed.

> The speech and Braille modules that I use are loaded after the grub
> prompt has appeared, so I need to change what kernel is used after
> the system is booted.

The procedure to achieve that depends on your version of grub
(grub-legacy or grub-pc).

For grub-legacy you need to edit the file /boot/grub/menu.lst. There
should be a line "default 0", which tells grub which entry to boot by
default; counting starts from zero. You have to replace the 0 by a 1 or
a 2, depending on whether you have an auto-generated "recovery mode"
entry for the trunk kernel before the newer regular kernel. You can find
the current order of kernels at the end of the menu.lst file, in the
section starting below the line "## ## End Default Options ##". 

If you have difficulties finding out which number your desired entry has
then you can run the following command as root to obtain an ordered
listing of all menu entries:

grep ^title /boot/grub/menu.lst

I suggest making a backup of menu.lst before you edit it and running
"update-grub" after you changed the default. Once you manage to boot
into the new kernel, you can remove the trunk one and reset the default
to 0. (The entries of the trunk kernel will be removed automatically
from the grub menu when this kernel is uninstalled.)


The procedure for grub-pc follows the same principle, but in that case
you have to change the line "GRUB_DEFAULT=0" in the file
/etc/default/grub, or you can use the "grub-set-default X" command as
root, where "X" is the number of your desired new default.  Again, run
"update-grub" afterwards to make sure the change is committed.

Here is the command for obtaining an ordered listing of the menu entries
of grub-pc:

grep -o '^menuentry.*"' /boot/grub/grub.cfg

-- 
Regards,|
  Florian   |


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100401211600.gc31...@bavaria.univ-lyon1.fr

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Jen]

I am blind, so selecting the kernel from the grub prompt is not possible. I 
want to use the new kernel (not trunk) as my default.


The speech and Braille modules that I use are loaded after the grub prompt 
has appeared, so I need to change what kernel is used after the system is 
booted.


Thanks for any help or suggestions,
Jen.

--
From: "Wolodja Wentland" 
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 10:50 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?




__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4986 (20100330) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/col112-ds10d6a4c6174d5be1af8203f2...@phx.gbl

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Wolodja Wentland]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 09:26 -, Jen wrote:
> I've installed linux-image-2.6.32-4-i686, but I can't boot in to the
> new kernel. I have also installed the latest version of grub.

I think I don't quite understand you. Stephen and I have pointed out the
reasons *why* the -trunk- kernel is still the kernel that is booted by
default in grub. I am sure that you can boot the newly installed kernel,
by selecting it *manually* at the grub prompt.

This would enable you to remove the now obsolete -trunk- package, which
will also result in -4- becoming the kernel booted by default, because
it is the only kernel installed, or at least the one with the highest
version numbers that adheres to the naming conventions.

This procedure has been detailed by Stephen and I don't see anything I
can add to that.

> What do I now have to do to get my machine to boot from the new
> kernel? 

Select it manually at grub's boot prompt.

> I've been told I should perge the package linux-image2.6.32-trunk-686,
> but I don't have to.

You don't have to, but why would you want to? If you want to keep both
packages and their kernels, but have your system to boot the -4- kernel
by default, you have to adjust your grub configuration.

The bug report [1] I pointed out contains a patch against
/usr/lib/grub/grub-mkconfig_lib that honours -trunk- and sorts it
beneath -4- ... 

Run update-grub after patching that file and everything should be fine,
given that the patch is OK. I haven't tested it and you will be on your
own if you do this. Make sure that you create a backup of the file
before you patch it.

I still don't quite understand why you insist on keeping the -trunk-
package though.

[1] http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=568160
-- 
  .''`. Wolodja Wentland 
 : :'  :
 `. `'` 4096R/CAF14EFC 
   `-   081C B7CD FF04 2BA9 94EA  36B2 8B7F 7D30 CAF1 4EFC


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Angus Hedger]

On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Jen  wrote:
> I've installed linux-image-2.6.32-4-i686, but I can't boot in to the new
> kernel. I have also installed the latest version of grub.
>
> What do I now have to do to get my machine to boot from the new kernel? I've
> been told I should perge the package linux-image2.6.32-trunk-686, but I
> don't have to.
>
> Cheers,
> Jen.
>


Hey,

Try:

$ sudo update-grub

Regards,

Angus


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/996de46c1003250238h5044786eh47b72ac70df85...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Jen]

I've installed linux-image-2.6.32-4-i686, but I can't boot in to the new 
kernel. I have also installed the latest version of grub.


What do I now have to do to get my machine to boot from the new kernel? I've 
been told I should perge the package linux-image2.6.32-trunk-686, but I 
don't have to.


Cheers,
Jen.




--
From: "Stephen Powell" 
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2010 2:45 AM
To: 
Subject: Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?


On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:51:25 -0400 (EDT), Jen wrote:


Hello,

I have the latest version of the Kernel package installed, and have 
grub2.


Can you please tell me what I need to modify in order to get my machine 
to

boot from the 2.6.32-4-i686?

Thanks,
Jen.


I'm not sure what you're saying, and I'm not sure what you're asking.
When you say "I have the latest version of the Kernel package installed",
are you saying that you have the latest stock kernel image installed,
which would be linux-image-2.6.32-4-686, I presume, or do you mean
that you have a package called kernel-package installed, which is used
to compile custom kernels?  I'm guessing the former.

Second, when you say "please tell me what I need to modify in order to get
my machine to boot from the 2.6.32-4-i686?"  Do you mean that you can't
get a custom kernel that you compiled yourself (with kernel-package) to 
boot?

Or do you simply mean that you want the latest stock kernel to boot by
default?  I assume the latter.

The simplest way is to purge the silly "trunk" kernel.  For example,

  aptitude purge linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686

The latest stock kernel image should then boot by default.  However, 
before

you do this, you must first boot something else by doing a manual
override boot.  In other words, you don't want to be running the
2.6.32-trunk kernel while you are trying to purge the 2.6.32-trunk kernel!
You don't *ever* want to try to purge a running kernel!
Manually select the 2.6.32-4-686 kernel from the grub boot menu to boot 
it.

Make sure that's what you're running by issuing the

  uname -r

command.  Then, once you're sure that you're not running the 2.6.32-trunk
kernel, issue the "aptitude purge" command above.  Then shutdown and
reboot.  The 2.6.32-4 kernel should then boot by default from then on.

--
 .''`. Stephen Powell
: :'  :
`. `'`
  `-


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/1230236975.21504541269485137816.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com




__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
signature database 4972 (20100324) __


The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com





__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4972 (20100324) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/col112-ds10f225b94438fd60a0ffe0f2...@phx.gbl

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Stephen Powell]

On Wed, 24 Mar 2010 18:51:25 -0400 (EDT), Jen wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I have the latest version of the Kernel package installed, and have grub2.
> 
> Can you please tell me what I need to modify in order to get my machine to 
> boot from the 2.6.32-4-i686?
> 
> Thanks,
> Jen.

I'm not sure what you're saying, and I'm not sure what you're asking.
When you say "I have the latest version of the Kernel package installed",
are you saying that you have the latest stock kernel image installed,
which would be linux-image-2.6.32-4-686, I presume, or do you mean
that you have a package called kernel-package installed, which is used
to compile custom kernels?  I'm guessing the former.

Second, when you say "please tell me what I need to modify in order to get
my machine to boot from the 2.6.32-4-i686?"  Do you mean that you can't
get a custom kernel that you compiled yourself (with kernel-package) to boot?
Or do you simply mean that you want the latest stock kernel to boot by
default?  I assume the latter.

The simplest way is to purge the silly "trunk" kernel.  For example,

   aptitude purge linux-image-2.6.32-trunk-686

The latest stock kernel image should then boot by default.  However, before
you do this, you must first boot something else by doing a manual
override boot.  In other words, you don't want to be running the
2.6.32-trunk kernel while you are trying to purge the 2.6.32-trunk kernel!
You don't *ever* want to try to purge a running kernel!
Manually select the 2.6.32-4-686 kernel from the grub boot menu to boot it.
Make sure that's what you're running by issuing the

   uname -r

command.  Then, once you're sure that you're not running the 2.6.32-trunk
kernel, issue the "aptitude purge" command above.  Then shutdown and
reboot.  The 2.6.32-4 kernel should then boot by default from then on.

-- 
  .''`. Stephen Powell
 : :'  :
 `. `'`
   `-


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/1230236975.21504541269485137816.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Jen]

Hello,

I have the latest version of the Kernel package installed, and have grub2.

Can you please tell me what I need to modify in order to get my machine to 
boot from the 2.6.32-4-i686?


Thanks,
Jen.




--
From: "Wolodja Wentland" 
Sent: Monday, March 22, 2010 9:37 PM
To: 
Subject: Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?


On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 21:33 -, Jen wrote:

Hello,

I can't read your message. I'm not sure if its because of the screen
reading software I'm using, so could you send it in plain text, in
case it's my accessibility software?


Well, no idea why you couldn't read it. The only thing i can think of is
that i've signed the mail with gpg. This one is unsigned.

--- snip ---
Do you still have the -trunk- image installed? If yes take a look at:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=568160

The easiest way to deal with this problem would be to remove the -trunk-
package. If you want to keep it, you would have to configure grub
accordingly. Which version of grub to you use?
--- snip 
--
 .''`. Wolodja Wentland
: :'  :
`. `'` 4096R/CAF14EFC
  `-   081C B7CD FF04 2BA9 94EA  36B2 8B7F 7D30 CAF1 4EFC


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100322213726.ge25...@kinakuta.local



__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
signature database 4966 (20100322) __


The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com





__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4972 (20100324) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/col112-ds21accca008e2a5a5179130f2...@phx.gbl

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Wolodja Wentland]

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 21:33 -, Jen wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I can't read your message. I'm not sure if its because of the screen
> reading software I'm using, so could you send it in plain text, in
> case it's my accessibility software?

Well, no idea why you couldn't read it. The only thing i can think of is
that i've signed the mail with gpg. This one is unsigned.

--- snip ---
Do you still have the -trunk- image installed? If yes take a look at:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=568160

The easiest way to deal with this problem would be to remove the -trunk-
package. If you want to keep it, you would have to configure grub
accordingly. Which version of grub to you use?
--- snip 
-- 
  .''`. Wolodja Wentland 
 : :'  :
 `. `'` 4096R/CAF14EFC 
   `-   081C B7CD FF04 2BA9 94EA  36B2 8B7F 7D30 CAF1 4EFC


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20100322213726.ge25...@kinakuta.local

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Angus Hedger]

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 9:33 PM, Jen  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I can't read your message. I'm not sure if its because of the screen reading
> software I'm using, so could you send it in plain text, in case it's my
> accessibility software?
>
> Cheers,
> Jen!


Hey,

Its a problem with the -trunk kernel if you have it installed, see
here: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=568160

The easiest way to go about fixing it is to purge the -trunk kernel.

(This is basically what Wolodja said :) )

Regards,

Angus


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: 
http://lists.debian.org/996de46c1003221439u4768deb7hc9c510460f63e...@mail.gmail.com

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Jen]

Hello,

I can't read your message. I'm not sure if its because of the screen reading 
software I'm using, so could you send it in plain text, in case it's my 
accessibility software?


Cheers,
Jen!




--
From: "Wolodja Wentland" 
Sent: Sunday, March 21, 2010 2:02 PM
To: 
Subject: Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?




__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4966 (20100322) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com




--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Archive: http://lists.debian.org/col112-ds20add30f45fba35cab210ef2...@phx.gbl

Re: Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Wolodja Wentland]

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 13:12 -, Jen wrote:
> I have installed the Kernel package Linux-image-2.6.32-4, but can't
> automatically boot from it. I thought I could just change the default number 
> in
> /boot/grub/menu.lst, but the new kernel package is not listed in this file.

Do you still have the -trunk- image installed? If yes take a look at:

http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=568160

The easiest way to deal with this problem would be to remove the -trunk-
package. If you want to keep it, you would have to configure grub
accordingly. Which version of grub to you use?
-- 
  .''`. Wolodja Wentland 
 : :'  :
 `. `'` 4096R/CAF14EFC 
   `-   081C B7CD FF04 2BA9 94EA  36B2 8B7F 7D30 CAF1 4EFC


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Booting from newly installed Kernel package?

[Jen]

Hello,

I have installed the Kernel package Linux-image-2.6.32-4, but can't 
automatically boot from it. I thought I could just change the default number in 
/boot/grub/menu.lst, but the new kernel package is not listed in this file.

Can I manually ad its details, and assign it a number? If not then what's the 
process for making it appear in the list of kernels in /boot/grub/menu.lst?

Any help would be really appreciated.

Thanks,
Jen.



__ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature 
database 4962 (20100321) __

The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.

http://www.eset.com

[PATCH]: lenny - kernel-package 11.015 for use with kernel_2.6.33

[Mart Frauenlob]

As this one:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=561569
does not really work on debian lenny (although suggested on some
websites) and i had to work myself through to get it working, here's a
patch for the kernel-package 11.015, that's currently in debian lenny,
for the use with a vanilla 2.6.33 kernel.
Attached, but pasted here also to be viewable without downloading the
attachment.


--- kernel-package/ruleset/targets/common.mk2008-11-24
18:01:32.0 +0100
+++ /usr/share/kernel-package/ruleset/targets/common.mk 2010-03-06
00:29:54.0 +0100
@@ -333,8 +333,14 @@
@echo this was built on a machine with the kernel: >> debian/buildinfo
uname -a >> debian/buildinfo
echo using the compiler: >> debian/buildinfo
-   grep LINUX_COMPILER include/linux/compile.h | \
-  sed -e 's/.*LINUX_COMPILER "//' -e 's/"$$//' >> debian/buildinfo
+   if [ -f include/generated/compile.h ]; then \
+   grep LINUX_COMPILER include/generated/compile.h | \
+  sed -e 's/.*LINUX_COMPILER "//' -e 's/"$$//' >>
debian/buildinfo; \
+   else \
+   grep LINUX_COMPILER include/linux/compile.h | \
+  sed -e 's/.*LINUX_COMPILER "//' -e 's/"$$//' >>
debian/buildinfo; \
+   fi
+
 ifneq ($(strip $(shell test -f version.Debian && cat version.Debian)),)
echo kernel source package used: >> debian/buildinfo
echo $(INT_STEM)-source-$(shell cat version.Debian) >> debian/buildinfo
--- kernel-package/ruleset/misc/version_vars.mk 2008-11-24
18:01:32.0 +0100
+++ /usr/share/kernel-package/ruleset/misc/version_vars.mk  2010-03-05
23:41:33.0 +0100
@@ -138,11 +138,13 @@
 EXTRAV_ARG :=
 endif

-UTS_RELEASE_HEADER=$(call doit,if [ -f include/linux/utsrelease.h ];
then  \
-  echo include/linux/utsrelease.h;\
-  else\
-   echo include/linux/version.h ;
\
-  fi)
+UTS_RELEASE_HEADER=$(call doit,if [ -f include/generated/utsrelease.h
]; then  \
+   echo include/generated/utsrelease.h ;   \
+   elif [ -f include/linux/utsrelease.h ]; then\
+   echo include/linux/utsrelease.h ;   \
+   else\
+   echo include/linux/version.h ;  \
+   fi)
 UTS_RELEASE_VERSION=$(call doit,if [ -f $(UTS_RELEASE_HEADER) ]; then
  \
  grep 'define UTS_RELEASE' $(UTS_RELEASE_HEADER) |
  \
  perl -nle
'm/^\s*\#define\s+UTS_RELEASE\s+("?)(\S+)\1/g && print $$2;';\



Hope it helps


Mart Frauenlob


debian_lenny_kernel-package.diff.tgz
Description: application/compressed

Re: Fwd: Boot problem with Kernel Package kernels

[Arthur Barlow]

Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2009 21:24:51 -0400
From: Celejar 
To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Fwd: Boot problem with Kernel Package kernels
Message-Id: <20090831212451.bc3e3572.cele...@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:50:45 -0700
Arthur Barlow  wrote:

...

> I'm been using Debian for over a decade now, and it's always been my
> practice to build new kernel with the "kernel-package" software that is
part
> of Debian's toolkit.  I"m noticed over the last few months that all
kernels
> I try to build will not boot and throw a "kernel panic."  The message is
as
> follows:
>
> No filesystem could mount root, tried:
> Kenel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on
> unknown-block(0,0)
>
> My grub menu.lst looks like this:
>
> titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.30
> root(hd0,0)
> kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.30 root=/dev/hda1 ro

...

> You can see I do not build an "initrd" image, but I've never had to in the
> past.  Thanks for any suggestions.

I've learned the hard way that there are lots of gotchas that can
generate that message, and they're not all too obvious.  The basic
things to look for - mobo and HDD drivers and fs support builtin to the
kernel (not as modules since you aren't using an initrd?  Same for
lvm / luks / raid or anything else needed to get your HDD online?

You should probably give us as much information as you can about your
setup, with regard to the above questions, and post your kernel config
somewhere, perhaps a pastebin.

Celejar

Celejar,

You were right.  I need to set my PCI drivers to be built-in instead of
modular, along with the file system drivers.  That fixed it.

Re: Fwd: Boot problem with Kernel Package kernels

[mertress]

On Tuesday 01 September 2009 04:50:45 Arthur Barlow wrote:
> -- Forwarded message --
> From: Arthur Barlow 
> Date: Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 12:56 PM
> Subject: Boot problem with Kernel Package kernels
> To: debian-u...@debian.org
>
>
> I'm been using Debian for over a decade now, and it's always been my
> practice to build new kernel with the "kernel-package" software that is
> part of Debian's toolkit.  I"m noticed over the last few months that all
> kernels I try to build will not boot and throw a "kernel panic."  The
> message is as follows:
>
> No filesystem could mount root, tried:
> Kenel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on
> unknown-block(0,0)
>
> My grub menu.lst looks like this:
>
> titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.30
> root(hd0,0)
> kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.30 root=/dev/hda1 ro
>
> titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.30 (single-user mode)
> root(hd0,0)
> kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.30 root=/dev/hda1 ro single
>
> titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.26-2-686
> root(hd0,0)
> kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.26-2-686 root=/dev/hda1 ro
> initrd/boot/initrd.img-2.6.26-2-686
>
> titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.26-2-686 (single-user mode)
> root(hd0,0)
> kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.26-2-686 root=/dev/hda1 ro single
> initrd/boot/initrd.img-2.6.26-2-686
>
> You can see I do not build an "initrd" image, but I've never had to in the
> past.  Thanks for any suggestions.
>
> Art

Hello
May be this is about your problem: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-
bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=523835 ?

If it is true, you can 
comment following string in /etc/kernel/postinst.d/initramfs-tools:
# kernel-package passes an extra arg; hack to not run under 
kernel-package
[ -z "$2" ] || exit 0

or

after installing your kernel package run
update-initramfs -c -k 
dpkg-reconfigure  
for updating bootloader.

Hope this help

mertress


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Fwd: Boot problem with Kernel Package kernels

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

In , Arthur 
Barlow wrote:
>No filesystem could mount root, tried:
>Kenel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on
>unknown-block(0,0)
>
>My grub menu.lst looks like this:
>
>titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.30
>root(hd0,0)
>kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.30 root=/dev/hda1 ro
^^

This is probably wrong.
-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.   ,= ,-_-. =.
b...@iguanasuicide.net   ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/\_/



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: Fwd: Boot problem with Kernel Package kernels

[Celejar]

On Mon, 31 Aug 2009 17:50:45 -0700
Arthur Barlow  wrote:

...

> I'm been using Debian for over a decade now, and it's always been my
> practice to build new kernel with the "kernel-package" software that is part
> of Debian's toolkit.  I"m noticed over the last few months that all kernels
> I try to build will not boot and throw a "kernel panic."  The message is as
> follows:
> 
> No filesystem could mount root, tried:
> Kenel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on
> unknown-block(0,0)
> 
> My grub menu.lst looks like this:
> 
> titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.30
> root(hd0,0)
> kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.30 root=/dev/hda1 ro

...

> You can see I do not build an "initrd" image, but I've never had to in the
> past.  Thanks for any suggestions.

I've learned the hard way that there are lots of gotchas that can
generate that message, and they're not all too obvious.  The basic
things to look for - mobo and HDD drivers and fs support builtin to the
kernel (not as modules since you aren't using an initrd?  Same for
lvm / luks / raid or anything else needed to get your HDD online?

You should probably give us as much information as you can about your
setup, with regard to the above questions, and post your kernel config
somewhere, perhaps a pastebin.

Celejar
-- 
mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email
ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Fwd: Boot problem with Kernel Package kernels

[Arthur Barlow]

-- Forwarded message --
From: Arthur Barlow 
Date: Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 12:56 PM
Subject: Boot problem with Kernel Package kernels
To: debian-u...@debian.org


I'm been using Debian for over a decade now, and it's always been my
practice to build new kernel with the "kernel-package" software that is part
of Debian's toolkit.  I"m noticed over the last few months that all kernels
I try to build will not boot and throw a "kernel panic."  The message is as
follows:

No filesystem could mount root, tried:
Kenel panic - not syncing: VFS: Unable to mount root fs on
unknown-block(0,0)

My grub menu.lst looks like this:

titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.30
root(hd0,0)
kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.30 root=/dev/hda1 ro

titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.30 (single-user mode)
root(hd0,0)
kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.30 root=/dev/hda1 ro single

titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.26-2-686
root(hd0,0)
kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.26-2-686 root=/dev/hda1 ro
initrd/boot/initrd.img-2.6.26-2-686

titleDebian GNU/Linux, kernel 2.6.26-2-686 (single-user mode)
root(hd0,0)
kernel/boot/vmlinuz-2.6.26-2-686 root=/dev/hda1 ro single
initrd/boot/initrd.img-2.6.26-2-686

You can see I do not build an "initrd" image, but I've never had to in the
past.  Thanks for any suggestions.

Art

Re: kernel rebuilds with kernel-package?

[Mikko Rapeli]

I installed kernel-package 12.014 on a lenny host and indeed rebuilding
without clean in between works. Though a lot of file copying seems to
happen in every build, but that's not too much.

Thanks Manoj!

-Mikko


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel rebuilds with kernel-package?

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Wed, Jun 24 2009, Mikko Rapeli wrote:

> Hello debian-users
>
> I have been pondering this for years and haven't found an answer: How
> does one re-compile a custom kernel after fixing a bug or adding patch
> with kernel-package _without_ rebuilding the whole kernel?
>
> I want to test new kernels every now and then and usually the first
> couple of compilation have issues. Fixing these issues wouldn't result in
> complete rebuilds if I compile natively, but with kernel_package they
> do. I find it easier to work with deb packages than to manually remove
> old kernels, modules etc.
>
> Is there some special build target I could use to just try
> rebuilding the objects which don't yet exists, e.g. fakeroot
> debian/rules kernel_binary_something?


With a recent kernel-package version (12.XX), you just call
 make-kpkg as you would normally (don't call make-kpkg clean). The very
 minimal rebuild is done.

So, make-kpkg  kernel_image should work just fine.

> With the official Debian kernel packages I found a rule for rebuilding
> the binary package -- though can't remeber which is was atm -- but with
> kernel-package I newer found a similar one.
>
> This would save a lot of time for me, thanks.

Try it and report if it does work for you.

manoj
-- 
Sanity and insanity overlap a fine grey line.
Manoj Srivastava  <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

kernel rebuilds with kernel-package?

[Mikko Rapeli]

Hello debian-users

I have been pondering this for years and haven't found an answer: How
does one re-compile a custom kernel after fixing a bug or adding patch
with kernel-package _without_ rebuilding the whole kernel?

I want to test new kernels every now and then and usually the first
couple of compilation have issues. Fixing these issues wouldn't result in
complete rebuilds if I compile natively, but with kernel_package they
do. I find it easier to work with deb packages than to manually remove
old kernels, modules etc.

Is there some special build target I could use to just try
rebuilding the objects which don't yet exists, e.g. fakeroot
debian/rules kernel_binary_something?

With the official Debian kernel packages I found a rule for rebuilding
the binary package -- though can't remeber which is was atm -- but with
kernel-package I newer found a similar one.

This would save a lot of time for me, thanks.

-Mikko


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

kernel-package or something else?

[Raffaele Morelli]

Hi you all,

yesterday I posted about problems with initrams and custom kernels... I
thought I made something wrong during kernel 2.6.29 config but today I guess
that something went wrong with kernel-package setup on my system.discovered

I currently unable to install any other kernel, not only a custom one but
the 2.6.26-2-686 too. I am always getting the same error about "No init
found. Try passing init= bootarg"

Where am I wrong?

regards
-r

Here are some info about kernel package conf

rmore...@debian-agf:/$ ls -lR /etc/kernel
/etc/kernel:
total 8
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2009-05-20 11:26 postinst.d
drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2009-05-20 11:45 postrm.d

/etc/kernel/postinst.d:
total 4
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 612 2009-05-20 11:26 initramfs

/etc/kernel/postrm.d:
total 4
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 919 2009-05-20 11:27 initramfs

rmore...@debian-agf:/$ cat /etc/kernel-img.conf
# Kernel image management overrides
# See kernel-img.conf(5) for details
do_symlinks = yes
relative_links = yes
do_bootloader = yes
do_bootfloppy = no
do_initrd = yes
link_in_boot = yes
postinst_hook = update-grub
postrm_hook   = update-grub

Re: failed to upgrade to next kernel package

[Douglas A. Tutty]

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 07:04:11PM -0400, Patrick Wiseman wrote:
> [Replying to debian-user, including OP's reply to me, which was
> presumably intended for debian-user.]
> 
> On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 6:32 PM, gianni  wrote:
> > Hi Patrick
> > this is the result from df -h
> > Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> > /dev/mapper/machina-root
> >                      322M  272M   34M  90% /
> > tmpfs                 1.5G     0  1.5G   0% /lib/init/rw
> > udev                   10M  128K  9.9M   2% /dev
> > tmpfs                 1.5G     0  1.5G   0% /dev/shm
> > /dev/sda1             228M   25M  191M  12% /boot
> > /dev/mapper/machina-home
> >                      136G   99G   32G  76% /home
> > /dev/mapper/machina-usr
> >                      4.6G  3.1G  1.4G  70% /usr
> > /dev/mapper/machina-var
> >                      2.8G  1.3G  1.4G  49% /var
> > tmpfs                 1.5G   20K  1.5G   1% /tmp
> >
> > the system is only 1 week old... I used the default option with the LVM,
> > what should I delete?
> 
> You have a very small root partition (322M) apparently, which is
> almost full, and which is where /lib resides (as you have no separate
> mapping for it).  I'm not sure what to suggest at this point (which is
> why these conversations should stay on the list; others may have all
> kinds of partition magic they can suggest, perhaps to expand the root
> partition while preserving your others, etc.).

Do you have a kernel that you are not using to boot which you could
remove, e.g. a -1 if you are trying to install a -2 version kernel?

I have a 477 MB / partition, of which 166 MB is used and I have both
2.6.26-1-686 and 2.6.26-2-686 kernels installed.

You should probably see what is taking up so much space in / since you
have separate /home, /var, /usr, with /tmp on tmpfs.  FYI, my /boot only
has 14 MB in it (two kernels, plus the grub stuff).

If there is nothing extraneous in / (including stuff in /root that
shouldn't be there), since this is LVM, can't you resize the partitions?
Assuming that you don't have any free space in the machina VG, take 500
MB from machine-home and add it to machina-root, taking care to do
whatever filesystem resizing is necessary (depending on what filesystem
type you are using).

Doug.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: failed to upgrade to next kernel package

[Patrick Wiseman]

[Replying to debian-user, including OP's reply to me, which was
presumably intended for debian-user.]

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 6:32 PM, gianni  wrote:
> Hi Patrick
> this is the result from df -h
> Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
> /dev/mapper/machina-root
>                      322M  272M   34M  90% /
> tmpfs                 1.5G     0  1.5G   0% /lib/init/rw
> udev                   10M  128K  9.9M   2% /dev
> tmpfs                 1.5G     0  1.5G   0% /dev/shm
> /dev/sda1             228M   25M  191M  12% /boot
> /dev/mapper/machina-home
>                      136G   99G   32G  76% /home
> /dev/mapper/machina-usr
>                      4.6G  3.1G  1.4G  70% /usr
> /dev/mapper/machina-var
>                      2.8G  1.3G  1.4G  49% /var
> tmpfs                 1.5G   20K  1.5G   1% /tmp
>
> the system is only 1 week old... I used the default option with the LVM,
> what should I delete?

You have a very small root partition (322M) apparently, which is
almost full, and which is where /lib resides (as you have no separate
mapping for it).  I'm not sure what to suggest at this point (which is
why these conversations should stay on the list; others may have all
kinds of partition magic they can suggest, perhaps to expand the root
partition while preserving your others, etc.).

Patrick


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: failed to upgrade to next kernel package

[Patrick Wiseman]

On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 5:51 PM, gianni  wrote:
> I dont understand the problem, when the new kernel was issued, I did run
> apt-get update & apt-get upgrade...
> and I get this error
>
> "Unpacking replacement linux-image-2.6.26-2-686 ...
> dpkg: error
> processing 
> /var/cache/apt/archives/linux-image-2.6.26-2-686_2.6.26-15lenny2_i386.deb 
> (--unpack):
>  failed in buffer_write(fd) (10, ret=-1): backend dpkg-deb during
> `./lib/modules/2.6.26-2-686/kernel/sound/usb/snd-usb-audio.ko': No space
> left on device

That says you're out of disk space.  What does 'df -h' tell you?

> dpkg-deb: subprocess paste killed by signal (Broken pipe)"
>
> I tried to force the installation with apt-get -f install, but is the
> some story...

Patrick


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: failed to upgrade to next kernel package

[Eduardo M KALINOWSKI]

gianni wrote:
> I dont understand the problem, when the new kernel was issued, I did run
> apt-get update & apt-get upgrade...
> and I get this error
>
> "Unpacking replacement linux-image-2.6.26-2-686 ...
> dpkg: error
> processing 
> /var/cache/apt/archives/linux-image-2.6.26-2-686_2.6.26-15lenny2_i386.deb 
> (--unpack):
>  failed in buffer_write(fd) (10, ret=-1): backend dpkg-deb during
> `./lib/modules/2.6.26-2-686/kernel/sound/usb/snd-usb-audio.ko': No space
> left on device
> dpkg-deb: subprocess paste killed by signal (Broken pipe)"
>
> I tried to force the installation with apt-get -f install, but is the
> some story...
>   

The message is quite clear: you are out of space on some device, in the
one that holds the /lib directory (most probably, this is you root
filesystem). You'll have to free some space.

-- 
Baseball is a skilled game.  It's America's game - it, and high taxes.
-- The Best of Will Rogers

Eduardo M KALINOWSKI
edua...@kalinowski.com.br


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

failed to upgrade to next kernel package

[gianni]

I dont understand the problem, when the new kernel was issued, I did run
apt-get update & apt-get upgrade...
and I get this error

"Unpacking replacement linux-image-2.6.26-2-686 ...
dpkg: error
processing 
/var/cache/apt/archives/linux-image-2.6.26-2-686_2.6.26-15lenny2_i386.deb 
(--unpack):
 failed in buffer_write(fd) (10, ret=-1): backend dpkg-deb during
`./lib/modules/2.6.26-2-686/kernel/sound/usb/snd-usb-audio.ko': No space
left on device
dpkg-deb: subprocess paste killed by signal (Broken pipe)"

I tried to force the installation with apt-get -f install, but is the
some story...

thanks


p.s.

I run debian lenny 
 



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[Randy Patterson]

On Friday 01 May 2009 17:52:54 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Fri, May 01 2009, Randy Patterson wrote:
> > My intention at this point is to make a detailed list of the
> > components on a particular system so I can remove everything that is
> > not needed. These would be older systems that will never be upgraded
> > or need new hardware so the kernel don't need a lot of options
> > concerning hardware. For example, I have used ext3 on the drives and
> > they don't need to access anything else and will remove all support
> > for ext2, ext4, NTFS and everything else.  I intend to compile
> > everything into the kernel without using modules. It's my
> > understanding from what I have read that this will result in a leaner
> > and some what faster kernel for that system. Is that a reasonable
> > assumption and approach?
>
> This is what I do. I do not use modules or initramfs, and it has
>  cut down my boot time by about 50%, according to bootchard.
>
> manoj

For my particular use I rarely reboot so boot time is not as important to me 
as is speeding up processor intensive applications, Have you seen any 
advantage of a custom kernel along those lines?

Randy


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Fri, May 01 2009, Randy Patterson wrote:


> My intention at this point is to make a detailed list of the
> components on a particular system so I can remove everything that is
> not needed. These would be older systems that will never be upgraded
> or need new hardware so the kernel don't need a lot of options
> concerning hardware. For example, I have used ext3 on the drives and
> they don't need to access anything else and will remove all support
> for ext2, ext4, NTFS and everything else.  I intend to compile
> everything into the kernel without using modules. It's my
> understanding from what I have read that this will result in a leaner
> and some what faster kernel for that system. Is that a reasonable
> assumption and approach?

This is what I do. I do not use modules or initramfs, and it has
 cut down my boot time by about 50%, according to bootchard.

manoj
-- 
Apples have meant trouble since eden. MaDsen Wikholm,
mwikh...@at8.abo.fi
Manoj Srivastava    
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[Dave Witbrodt]

Randy Patterson wrote:
So on a dedicated system that is used for nothing but running a processor 
intensive application 24/7, do you think there would be any real increase in 
performance from a custom kernel?


My gut reaction is "no," but I do not claim to have data to back that 
up.  If there is a measurable inefficiency introduced into system calls 
to a loaded module versus a built-in module, then you could arguably get 
some minimal throughput gain over a long time period given the situation 
you're describing.


For actual data, you might try asking on the mailing list for the Debian 
Kernel Team, or even at the Linux Kernel Mailing List.  Please read some 
FAQs first, because this may well be a question that has been 
asked-and-answered to death.


Since you're admittedly using "older" systems anyway, we're talking 
about (at the very most) losing a tiny percentage of efficiency on 
machines that weren't going to be the major contributors of throughput 
in the first place.  I'm thinking I would be a Bad and Evil person if I 
encouraged you to custom compile your own kernels for _only_ the purpose 
you are describing.  (If there were some educational goal on your own 
part that you were pursuing, it would start to make more sense, IMHO.)



DW


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[Randy Patterson]

On Friday 01 May 2009 09:34:58 Dave Witbrodt wrote:
> Faster?  I promise that you would not notice the speedup.  Conceivably
> your kernel will boot slightly faster without having to carry out the
> hardware detection for the 99% of modules that have no relevance for
> your particular system, but you would have great difficulty measuring
> the alleged time savings accurately.  (There are great opportunities for
> decreasing the time needed to boot a Debian system, but these have to do
> with customizing the initialization scripts, not with replacing the
> kitchen-sink kernel with a custom kernel.)

Interesting, I would have thought the difference would have been a little more 
noticeable. I may have to reconsider.

> As far as being in a hurry to leave out unnecessary things like ext2,
> ext4, and NTFS... I would ask you to reconsider.  What happens if you
> meet other Linux users in your area, and they want to give you some
> files off of their USB flash drive formatted in ext2 or ext4?  Or what
> happens if some Windows user you meet has some files on their external
> hard drive... formatted in NTFS?  Now your really great idea about
> compiling your own kernel is really going to make you look smart to
> those folks, right?  Your choices at that point will be to recompile
> your custom kernel, or boot to a Debian kitchen-sink kernel.  (Which
> just raises the question of why you weren't using the Debian kernel in
> the first place.)

A very good point but one I have considered. The systems I have in mind are 
some that I don't use for anything but grid computing. I run Bionc on projects 
at the World Community Grid, these systems will just run 24/7 until they break 
and I will then throw them in the trash. They are older systems not worth my 
time to fix so your point above although valid in most cases doesn't apply to 
my very particular goal. None of my daily use systems would be running a 
custom kernel.

> I'm not trying to discourage you from building your own kernel.  I'm
> trying to offer information that I think you should consider, and I'm
> offering the advice that you shouldn't bother building your own kernel
> unless you have some really good reason.  (Really good reasons might
> include a burning desire to simply know how, or to be able to say you
> did it, but if one of those is you only reason then I think you will
> regret it by about halfway through the process.)

I understand there is a time investment and learning curve to consider.  But 
if I can get a little extra processor and ram use from a leaner kernel, this 
is something I may do many more times in the future so it would be worth that 
investment. But not if the increase in computing power has to be measured in 
milliseconds per day!

> The Debian kernel team works really hard to make sure that the kernels
> work, and they do a good job.  In the end, I was able to customize my
> kernel configuration to the point that I can compile a kernel in about
> 6 minutes on my desktop machine... which is (at least) 6 minutes longer
> than it would take me to install a Debian kernel.  ;)  If I hadn't had
> problems with ALSA support with this machine when I first put it
> together, I probably would not have bothered to learn to compile my own
> kernels.  The amount of time in invested in learning how to do it now
> causes me to want to keep doing it, so I don't have the feeling that I
> wasted those dozens of hours -- and so I am condemned to the punishment
> of Sisyphus.

So on a dedicated system that is used for nothing but running a processor 
intensive application 24/7, do you think there would be any real increase in 
performance from a custom kernel?

>
> HTH,
> Dave W.

Thanks for your time and input Dave,
Randy


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[Dave Witbrodt]

Randy Patterson wrote:
My intention at this point is to make a detailed list of the components on a 
particular system so I can remove everything that is not needed. These would 
be older systems that will never be upgraded or need new hardware so the 
kernel don't need a lot of options concerning hardware. For example, I have 
used ext3 on the drives and they don't need to access anything else and will 
remove all support for ext2, ext4, NTFS and everything else.  I intend to 
compile everything into the kernel without using modules. It's my 
understanding from what I have read that this will result in a leaner and some 
what faster kernel for that system. Is that a reasonable assumption and 
approach?


What is "reasonable" is a matter of opinion.  Even though I carried out 
the massive research project you are describing above, and determined 
the exact set of configuration options needed to compile a custom kernel 
which exactly fits my hardware (and _only_ my hardware), I would not 
recommend anyone else to do so unless they had some specific need or 
purpose.  My purpose has been to learn how Debian works "under the 
hood," with the intent of being able to contribute useful work later -- 
in the form of fixing bugs, writing and packaging my own software, and 
(possibly) becoming a Debian developer.


Leaner?  My own experience is that my kernel binaries are _larger_ than 
a Debian kitchen-sink kernel, while the disk space taken up for the 
initial ramdisk (initrd) and loadable modules in /lib/modules goes away 
almost entirely:


# ls -lA /boot | cut -f5- -d' '
[...]
7653318 2009-04-20 07:43 initrd.img-2.6.28-1-amd64
[...]
2041664 2009-02-18 13:02 vmlinuz-2.6.28-1-amd64
2921024 2009-03-21 12:57 vmlinuz-2.6.28-2s13145.090321.desktop.uvesafb

# du -s -b /lib/modules/*
210911107   /lib/modules/2.6.28-1-amd64
15089013/lib/modules/2.6.28-2s13145.090321.desktop.uvesafb

The 15 MB of modules in my current custom kernel's /lib/modules path are 
mostly unnecessary, and could easily be reduced below 2 MB (maybe even

1 MB).

Faster?  I promise that you would not notice the speedup.  Conceivably 
your kernel will boot slightly faster without having to carry out the 
hardware detection for the 99% of modules that have no relevance for 
your particular system, but you would have great difficulty measuring 
the alleged time savings accurately.  (There are great opportunities for 
decreasing the time needed to boot a Debian system, but these have to do 
with customizing the initialization scripts, not with replacing the 
kitchen-sink kernel with a custom kernel.)


As far as being in a hurry to leave out unnecessary things like ext2, 
ext4, and NTFS... I would ask you to reconsider.  What happens if you 
meet other Linux users in your area, and they want to give you some 
files off of their USB flash drive formatted in ext2 or ext4?  Or what 
happens if some Windows user you meet has some files on their external 
hard drive... formatted in NTFS?  Now your really great idea about 
compiling your own kernel is really going to make you look smart to 
those folks, right?  Your choices at that point will be to recompile 
your custom kernel, or boot to a Debian kitchen-sink kernel.  (Which 
just raises the question of why you weren't using the Debian kernel in 
the first place.)


I'm not trying to discourage you from building your own kernel.  I'm 
trying to offer information that I think you should consider, and I'm 
offering the advice that you shouldn't bother building your own kernel 
unless you have some really good reason.  (Really good reasons might 
include a burning desire to simply know how, or to be able to say you 
did it, but if one of those is you only reason then I think you will 
regret it by about halfway through the process.)


The Debian kernel team works really hard to make sure that the kernels 
work, and they do a good job.  In the end, I was able to customize my 
kernel configuration to the point that I can compile a kernel in about
6 minutes on my desktop machine... which is (at least) 6 minutes longer 
than it would take me to install a Debian kernel.  ;)  If I hadn't had 
problems with ALSA support with this machine when I first put it 
together, I probably would not have bothered to learn to compile my own 
kernels.  The amount of time in invested in learning how to do it now 
causes me to want to keep doing it, so I don't have the feeling that I 
wasted those dozens of hours -- and so I am condemned to the punishment 
of Sisyphus.



The whole subject of initrds scripts is something I will need to study up on. 
But are you saying that if I don't use modules that I don't need to worry 
about needing these scripts?


When you boot a kernel, then any feature required by your system to be 
able to boot will have to be available before your hard disks are 
mounted.  There are two ways to accomplish this:


1.  Build the features directly into the kernel binary, instead of 
building th

Re: kernel-package??

[Randy Patterson]

On Thursday 30 April 2009 14:30:42 Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30 2009, thveillon.debian wrote:
>
> ers are non-essential.
>
> > Installing the created .deb will take care of all the linking (/initrd,
> > /vmlinuz, build dir...), boot-loader update (with grub at least), initrd
> >  creation/update and such.
>
> Actually, with the 12.XX branch, you get to choose what happens
>  when the kernel image is installed, by dropping scripts into
>  /etc/kernel -- by default, no action is taken
>
>  For example, to create an initramfs, I did:
> --8<---cut here-------start->8---
>  cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postinst.d/yaird \
> /etc/kernel/postinst.d/
>  cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postrm.d/yaird \
> /etc/kernel/postrm.d/
> --8<---cut here---end--->8---
>
> Or, alternately, you could do:
> --8<---cut here---start->8---
>  cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postinst.d/initramfs \
> /etc/kernel/postinst.d/
>  cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postrm.d/initramfs \
> /etc/kernel/postrm.d/
> --8<---cut here---end--->8---
>
> To run grub, I have in /etc/kernel-img.conf:
> --8<---cut here---start->8---
> postinst_hook = update-grub
> postrm_hook   = update-grub
> --8<---cut here---end--->8---
>
> But really, you can substitute your own scripts, or decide not
>  to use initrds (which is a sane option if you are building your own
>  kernels and thus might not have any modules at all).
>
> manoj

My intention at this point is to make a detailed list of the components on a 
particular system so I can remove everything that is not needed. These would 
be older systems that will never be upgraded or need new hardware so the 
kernel don't need a lot of options concerning hardware. For example, I have 
used ext3 on the drives and they don't need to access anything else and will 
remove all support for ext2, ext4, NTFS and everything else.  I intend to 
compile everything into the kernel without using modules. It's my 
understanding from what I have read that this will result in a leaner and some 
what faster kernel for that system. Is that a reasonable assumption and 
approach?

The whole subject of initrds scripts is something I will need to study up on. 
But are you saying that if I don't use modules that I don't need to worry 
about needing these scripts?

Thanks,
Randy


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Thu, Apr 30 2009, thveillon.debian wrote:

ers are non-essential.
>
> Installing the created .deb will take care of all the linking (/initrd,
> /vmlinuz, build dir...), boot-loader update (with grub at least), initrd
>  creation/update and such.

Actually, with the 12.XX branch, you get to choose what happens
 when the kernel image is installed, by dropping scripts into
 /etc/kernel -- by default, no action is taken

 For example, to create an initramfs, I did:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
 cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postinst.d/yaird \
/etc/kernel/postinst.d/
 cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postrm.d/yaird \
/etc/kernel/postrm.d/
--8<---cut here---end--->8---

Or, alternately, you could do:
--8<---cut here---start----->8---
 cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postinst.d/initramfs \
/etc/kernel/postinst.d/
 cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postrm.d/initramfs \
/etc/kernel/postrm.d/
--8<---cut here---end--->8---

To run grub, I have in /etc/kernel-img.conf:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
postinst_hook = update-grub
postrm_hook   = update-grub
--8<---cut here---end--->8---

But really, you can substitute your own scripts, or decide not
 to use initrds (which is a sane option if you are building your own
 kernels and thus might not have any modules at all).

manoj
-- 
Absinthe makes the tart grow fonder.
Manoj Srivastava  <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[Dave Patterson]

* Randy Patterson  [2009-04-30 11:29:33 -0500]:


> Dave, with a last name like yours I must assume that this is excellent 
> advice! 
> :-) Thanks for everyone's input. I will now travel down the kernel-package 
> road. 

The tutorial's old, but it stands the test of time ;-)

And don't assume anything about the name.  We got some pirates in our
branch... 

-- 
Dave


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: kernel-package??

[Randy Patterson]

On Thursday 30 April 2009 11:09:49 Dave Patterson wrote:
> * Randy Patterson  [2009-04-30 10:28:00 -0500]:
> > I guess I assumed that kernel-package was to build the kernel from the
> > source used by the current Debian distro installed. So if that's not the
> > case and I decided to use the latest stable from kernel.org, is it
> > advantageous to use kernel-package or find a good howto and learn to
> > build and install using a more low level approach. I'm mainly looking at
> > just optimizing the config file for a particular systems to building a
> > leaner meaner kernel. I have some older systems that don't do anything
> > but grid computing. I thought if I removed a lot of the stuff that wasn't
> > being used in the kernel I could speed these up a little.
>
> Yup, I do that, and I use kernel-package to do it.  It's a very
> versatile wrapper script that calls the necessary commands to do the
> actual compiling of the kernel and and then builds a debian package
> which you can then install with 'dpkg -i'.
>
> the configuration of the kernel you do prior to using kernel-package,
> usually thru an ncurseѕ, qt, or gtk interface.
>
> Good tutorial here:
>
> <http://newbiedoc.sourceforge.net/system/kernel-pkg.html>

Dave, with a last name like yours I must assume that this is excellent advice! 
:-) Thanks for everyone's input. I will now travel down the kernel-package 
road. 

Randy


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[thveillon.debian]

Randy Patterson wrote :
> On Thursday 30 April 2009 09:51:54 Michael Pobega wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 09:24:43AM -0500, Randy Patterson wrote:
>>> I'm looking to start using my own custom kernels for various reasons. At
>>> this point I'm just researching the various options or ways in going
>>> about this and in the process installed kernel-package. I learned the
>>> hard way a couple years ago when I first started using Linux that before
>>> diving into documentation I first need to try to determine it's age. So
>>> after installing kernel-package the first thing I did was go to the
>>> bottom of the man page and looked at the date, May 25, 1999! Now I
>>> realize that is not necessarily the date of the last update but this
>>> doesn't give me a good feeling about diving into it's details that could
>>> be 10 years old. So is it better to just use an upstream source from
>>> kernel.org and build that or will that only create more work trying to
>>> get that running with a current Debian distro? I'm certainly not looking
>>> for a detailed howto on this list, but looking for advise on the road to
>>> take to get there. Or at least the road with more pros than cons. Thanks,
>>> Randy
>> Just fyi, kernel-package isn't a kernel itself; it's the tools used to
>> build a vanilla kernel (like the ones from kernel.org) into a deb file.
>>
> 
> I guess I assumed that kernel-package was to build the kernel from the source 
> used by the current Debian distro installed. So if that's not the case and I 
> decided to use the latest stable from kernel.org, is it advantageous to use 
> kernel-package or find a good howto and learn to build and install using a 
> more 
> low level approach. I'm mainly looking at just optimizing the config file for 
> a 
> particular systems to building a leaner meaner kernel. I have some older 
> systems that don't do anything but grid computing. I thought if I removed a 
> lot of the stuff that wasn't being used in the kernel I could speed these up 
> a 
> little.
> 
> Randy
> 
> 
Kernel-package really speeds up the process of building a kernel, but
the bulk of what you want to do will occur during the configuration.
Basically kernel-package allows you to build a kernel, all modules, an
initrd (if desired), pack it up in .deb in one shot. Then you just have
to install the created .deb with "dpkg -i". The basic command, once the
configuration is done, is:

make-kpkg --initrd --append-to-version -custom_name --revision 1 \
kernel-image kernel-headers

initrd and headers are non-essential.

Installing the created .deb will take care of all the linking (/initrd,
/vmlinuz, build dir...), boot-loader update (with grub at least), initrd
 creation/update and such.

Without it you'll have to go with the "make - make modules_install -
make install" routine, no such thing as a .deb, and take care of the
rest yourself (initrd, links, boot-loader update...).

So in my opinion it's worth looking into kernel-package, that's one of
the feature I most appreciated when trying to Debian. (I usually build
my kernels from vanilla kernel.org sources, out of habit and curiosity
more than technical need.).

Tom


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[Dave Patterson]

* Randy Patterson  [2009-04-30 10:28:00 -0500]:


> 
> I guess I assumed that kernel-package was to build the kernel from the source 
> used by the current Debian distro installed. So if that's not the case and I 
> decided to use the latest stable from kernel.org, is it advantageous to use 
> kernel-package or find a good howto and learn to build and install using a 
> more 
> low level approach. I'm mainly looking at just optimizing the config file for 
> a 
> particular systems to building a leaner meaner kernel. I have some older 
> systems that don't do anything but grid computing. I thought if I removed a 
> lot of the stuff that wasn't being used in the kernel I could speed these up 
> a 
> little.

Yup, I do that, and I use kernel-package to do it.  It's a very
versatile wrapper script that calls the necessary commands to do the
actual compiling of the kernel and and then builds a debian package
which you can then install with 'dpkg -i'.

the configuration of the kernel you do prior to using kernel-package,
usually thru an ncurseѕ, qt, or gtk interface.

Good tutorial here:

<http://newbiedoc.sourceforge.net/system/kernel-pkg.html> 


-- 
Cheers¸
Dave


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: kernel-package??

[Randy Patterson]

On Thursday 30 April 2009 09:51:54 Michael Pobega wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 09:24:43AM -0500, Randy Patterson wrote:
> > I'm looking to start using my own custom kernels for various reasons. At
> > this point I'm just researching the various options or ways in going
> > about this and in the process installed kernel-package. I learned the
> > hard way a couple years ago when I first started using Linux that before
> > diving into documentation I first need to try to determine it's age. So
> > after installing kernel-package the first thing I did was go to the
> > bottom of the man page and looked at the date, May 25, 1999! Now I
> > realize that is not necessarily the date of the last update but this
> > doesn't give me a good feeling about diving into it's details that could
> > be 10 years old. So is it better to just use an upstream source from
> > kernel.org and build that or will that only create more work trying to
> > get that running with a current Debian distro? I'm certainly not looking
> > for a detailed howto on this list, but looking for advise on the road to
> > take to get there. Or at least the road with more pros than cons. Thanks,
> > Randy
>
> Just fyi, kernel-package isn't a kernel itself; it's the tools used to
> build a vanilla kernel (like the ones from kernel.org) into a deb file.
>

I guess I assumed that kernel-package was to build the kernel from the source 
used by the current Debian distro installed. So if that's not the case and I 
decided to use the latest stable from kernel.org, is it advantageous to use 
kernel-package or find a good howto and learn to build and install using a more 
low level approach. I'm mainly looking at just optimizing the config file for a 
particular systems to building a leaner meaner kernel. I have some older 
systems that don't do anything but grid computing. I thought if I removed a 
lot of the stuff that wasn't being used in the kernel I could speed these up a 
little.

Randy


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[Michael Pobega]

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 09:24:43AM -0500, Randy Patterson wrote:
> I'm looking to start using my own custom kernels for various reasons. At this 
> point I'm just researching the various options or ways in going about this 
> and 
> in the process installed kernel-package. I learned the hard way a couple 
> years 
> ago when I first started using Linux that before diving into documentation I 
> first need to try to determine it's age. So after installing kernel-package 
> the 
> first thing I did was go to the bottom of the man page and looked at the 
> date, 
> May 25, 1999! Now I realize that is not necessarily the date of the last 
> update but this doesn't give me a good feeling about diving into it's details 
> that could be 10 years old. So is it better to just use an upstream source 
> from kernel.org and build that or will that only create more work trying to 
> get that running with a current Debian distro? I'm certainly not looking for 
> a 
> detailed howto on this list, but looking for advise on the road to take to 
> get 
> there. Or at least the road with more pros than cons. Thanks, Randy
> 
> 

Just fyi, kernel-package isn't a kernel itself; it's the tools used to
build a vanilla kernel (like the ones from kernel.org) into a deb file.

-- 
  http://fuzzydev.org/~pobega
http://identi.ca/pobega


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: kernel-package??

[thveillon.debian]

Randy Patterson wrote :
> I'm looking to start using my own custom kernels for various reasons. At this 
> point I'm just researching the various options or ways in going about this 
> and 
> in the process installed kernel-package. I learned the hard way a couple 
> years 
> ago when I first started using Linux that before diving into documentation I 
> first need to try to determine it's age. So after installing kernel-package 
> the 
> first thing I did was go to the bottom of the man page and looked at the 
> date, 
> May 25, 1999! Now I realize that is not necessarily the date of the last 
> update but this doesn't give me a good feeling about diving into it's details 
> that could be 10 years old. So is it better to just use an upstream source 
> from kernel.org and build that or will that only create more work trying to 
> get that running with a current Debian distro? I'm certainly not looking for 
> a 
> detailed howto on this list, but looking for advise on the road to take to 
> get 
> there. Or at least the road with more pros than cons. Thanks, Randy
> 
> 

Hi,

on Lenny kernel-package is still the good old one, so maybe the man
isn't outdated after all.
On Squeeze and Sid the package dramatically changed, install
"apt-listchanges" before installing it, and dig into the man page. You
can see a comment from the maintainer in the recent thread "missing the
initrd file in the kernel package" on this list.

What is your specific question about kernel-package, and on which Debian
version do you plan to use it ?

Tom


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

kernel-package??

[Randy Patterson]

I'm looking to start using my own custom kernels for various reasons. At this 
point I'm just researching the various options or ways in going about this and 
in the process installed kernel-package. I learned the hard way a couple years 
ago when I first started using Linux that before diving into documentation I 
first need to try to determine it's age. So after installing kernel-package the 
first thing I did was go to the bottom of the man page and looked at the date, 
May 25, 1999! Now I realize that is not necessarily the date of the last 
update but this doesn't give me a good feeling about diving into it's details 
that could be 10 years old. So is it better to just use an upstream source 
from kernel.org and build that or will that only create more work trying to 
get that running with a current Debian distro? I'm certainly not looking for a 
detailed howto on this list, but looking for advise on the road to take to get 
there. Or at least the road with more pros than cons. Thanks, Randy


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: missing the initrd file in the kernel package

[emikaadeo]

Manoj Srivastava wrote:


> Now, nothing is created automatically. you need to provide a
>  hook script for this to happen.  The user provides such scripts. For
>  example, to invoke mkinitramfs, I did:
> --8<---cut here---start->8---
>  cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postinst.d/initramfs \
> /etc/kernel/postinst.d/
>  cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postrm.d/initramfs \
> /etc/kernel/postrm.d/
> --8<---cut here---end--->8---
> 
> To run grub, I have in /etc/kernel-img.conf:
> --8<---cut here---start->8---
> postinst_hook = update-grub
> postrm_hook   = update-grub
> --8<---cut here---end--->8---
> 
> You can look at other example in the examples directory:
>  /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/
>  to see if there are other example script you want to cp into
>  /etc/kernel -- and you can create your own scripts.
> 
Now everything is clear to me ;)
Big thanks!




-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: missing the initrd file in the kernel package

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Wed, Apr 29 2009, emikaadeo wrote:

> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 29 2009, Antonio Diaz wrote:
>> 
>>>   When I compile the kernel the file "initrd" is not created in spite
>>> of I'm specifying the "--initrd" option in the command line. Exactly,
>>> the command that I'm using to compile the kernel is:
>>>
>>> "make-kpkg --initrd --revision=1:xps.10 kernel_image"
>>>
>>>   May be there is a problem with the application that creates the
>>> initrd file.
>>>
>>>   Any suggestions?
>> 
>> ,[ Manual page make-kpkg(1) ]
>> |  --initrd
>> | If make-kpkg is generating a kernel-image package, arrange to
>> | convey to the hook scripts that this image requires an initrd,
>> | and that the initrd generation hook scripts should not short
>> | circuit early. Without this option, the example initramfs hook
>> | scripts bundled in with ker‐ nel-package will take no action on
>> | installation.  The same effect can be achieved by setting the
>> | environment variable INITRD to any non empty value.  Please note
>> | that unless there are hook scripts in /etc/kenel or added into
>> | the hook script parameter of /etc/kernel-img.conf.  no initrd
>> | will be created.
>> `
>> 
>>     So, drop in scripts in /etc/kernel/post{inst,rm}.d/ to
>>  create/delete the initramfs files. You can use yaird, or
>>  initramfs-tools. For the latter, there are example scripts that you
>>  could use as a starting point:
>>  /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/post{inst,rm}.d/initramfs
>> 
>> manoj
> I upgraded to kernel-package 12.010
> If i use a :
> make-kpkg --initrd kernel_image
> then created .deb will have a initrd image ?

No. The initrd image has neer been a part of the kernel image
 deb, and it still is not. The initramfs/initrd bits arte always
 generated on the machine the kernel image is installed upon.

> And it will install it ?

Well, since the initramfs image is not pat of the linux-image-*
 packages, install is not the right word. Create is what actually needs
 to happen.

Now, nothing is created automatically. you need to provide a
 hook script for this to happen.  The user provides such scripts. For
 example, to invoke mkinitramfs, I did:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
 cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postinst.d/initramfs \
/etc/kernel/postinst.d/
 cp /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/postrm.d/initramfs \
/etc/kernel/postrm.d/
--8<---cut here---end--->8---

To run grub, I have in /etc/kernel-img.conf:
--8<---cut here---start->8---
postinst_hook = update-grub
postrm_hook   = update-grub
--8<---cut here---end--->8---

You can look at other example in the examples directory:
 /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/
 to see if there are other example script you want to cp into
 /etc/kernel -- and you can create your own scripts.

> Sorry but my english is not so good, so i'm trying to get this clear.

That's all right. English was my fourth language as well.

manoj
-- 
That's no moon... Obi-wan Kenobi
Manoj Srivastava  <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: missing the initrd file in the kernel package

[emikaadeo]

Manoj Srivastava wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 29 2009, Antonio Diaz wrote:
> 
>>   When I compile the kernel the file "initrd" is not created in spite
>> of I'm specifying the "--initrd" option in the command line. Exactly,
>> the command that I'm using to compile the kernel is:
>>
>> "make-kpkg --initrd --revision=1:xps.10 kernel_image"
>>
>>   May be there is a problem with the application that creates the
>> initrd file.
>>
>>   Any suggestions?
> 
> ,[ Manual page make-kpkg(1) ]
> |  --initrd
> | If make-kpkg is generating a kernel-image package, arrange to
> | convey to the hook scripts that this image requires an initrd,
> | and that the initrd generation hook scripts should not short
> | circuit early. Without this option, the example initramfs hook
> | scripts bundled in with ker‐ nel-package will take no action on
> | installation.  The same effect can be achieved by setting the
> | environment variable INITRD to any non empty value.  Please note
> | that unless there are hook scripts in /etc/kenel or added into
> | the hook script parameter of /etc/kernel-img.conf.  no initrd
> | will be created.
> `
> 
> So, drop in scripts in /etc/kernel/post{inst,rm}.d/ to
>  create/delete the initramfs files. You can use yaird, or
>  initramfs-tools. For the latter, there are example scripts that you
>  could use as a starting point:
>  /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/post{inst,rm}.d/initramfs
> 
> manoj
I upgraded to kernel-package 12.010
If i use a :
make-kpkg --initrd kernel_image
then created .deb will have a initrd image ?
And it will install it ?
Sorry but my english is not so good, so i'm trying to get this clear.



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: missing the initrd file in the kernel package

[Manoj Srivastava]

On Wed, Apr 29 2009, Antonio Diaz wrote:

>   When I compile the kernel the file "initrd" is not created in spite
> of I'm specifying the "--initrd" option in the command line. Exactly,
> the command that I'm using to compile the kernel is:
>
> "make-kpkg --initrd --revision=1:xps.10 kernel_image"
>
>   May be there is a problem with the application that creates the
> initrd file.
>
>   Any suggestions?

,[ Manual page make-kpkg(1) ]
|  --initrd
| If make-kpkg is generating a kernel-image package, arrange to
| convey to the hook scripts that this image requires an initrd,
| and that the initrd generation hook scripts should not short
| circuit early. Without this option, the example initramfs hook
| scripts bundled in with ker‐ nel-package will take no action on
| installation.  The same effect can be achieved by setting the
| environment variable INITRD to any non empty value.  Please note
| that unless there are hook scripts in /etc/kenel or added into
| the hook script parameter of /etc/kernel-img.conf.  no initrd
| will be created.
`

So, drop in scripts in /etc/kernel/post{inst,rm}.d/ to
 create/delete the initramfs files. You can use yaird, or
 initramfs-tools. For the latter, there are example scripts that you
 could use as a starting point:
 /usr/share/kernel-package/examples/etc/kernel/post{inst,rm}.d/initramfs

manoj
-- 
And then there was the lawyer that stepped in cow manure and thought he
was melting...
Manoj Srivastava  <http://www.golden-gryphon.com/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

missing the initrd file in the kernel package

[Antonio Diaz]

  Hi,

  When I compile the kernel the file "initrd" is not created in spite 
of I'm specifying the "--initrd" option in the command line. Exactly, 
the command that I'm using to compile the kernel is:


"make-kpkg --initrd --revision=1:xps.10 kernel_image"

  May be there is a problem with the application that creates the 
initrd file.


  Any suggestions?


__ 
LLama Gratis a cualquier PC del Mundo. 
Llamadas a fijos y móviles desde 1 céntimo por minuto. 
http://es.voice.yahoo.com



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

New version of kernel-package now in unstable

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

This brings to an end an enhancement for kernel-package that
 have been in development for over an year. These changes make
 kernel-package more nimble (you can just update the sources, hack on a
 file, and run make-kpkg and it should just work to incorporate your
 changes, no need for clean).

It also pulls out the postint functionality into hook scripts,
 using the same /etc/kernel.d infrastructure as upstreams native deb-pkg
 target, but provides for more packages.

Also supported now is a linux-image-$version-dbg package, that
 contains just the debugging information, and which is compatible with
 SystemTap.

Looking at the reverse dependencies, there should be no impact
 whatsoever on the module packages; everything should still work the
 same.

However, since ./debian is now ephemeral, anyone who puts things
 in ./debian will be affected. Those users should depend on
 kernel-package (<< 12.001).  The only user I know of that did that
 was linux-2.6, but since kernel-package has been deprecated and
 pronounced broken by the kernel team, this is not an issue: if it is
 deprecated, and obsolescent, development if kernel-package need not be
 tied to linux-2.6. In any case, official kernels are no longer
 supported as of k-p 12.001.

manoj
-- 
"Bug #523423: Plesase Remove bitchx from the archive. Full of crap." -
Debian BTS
Manoj Srivastava  <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B  924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org

Re: Forthcoming changes in kernel-package

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

A few hours ago, a new version of kernel-package was uploaded to
 Experimental.  This is a major change, the new kernel-package is far
 more nimble, more flexible, and supports people who make a minor change
 to a kernel, or who update the kernel sources (via git or otherwise),
 and want a minimal, simple, recompile. 

 79 files changed, 1776 insertions(+), 3706 deletions(-)

The full NEWS.Debian file is appended below, but I'll highlight
 the major differences: This version does not support the official
 images (which is OK, since the kernel  team thinks kernel-package is
 broken anyway, and have been deprecating it for a few years now), it
 does not run a bootloader, or manage symlinks, or create an init ram fs
 for you -- since the policies governing these actions were becoming too
 rigid, and had to cater to the lowest common denominator.

Instead, the package comes with example scripts that can be
 dropped into /etc/kernel/*.d directories to do all that, and more (you
 can change the number of symlinks you keep,  for example). Now you can
 add actions to {pre,post}{inst,rm} stages of the package installation or
 removal, independently, for image, header, source, and doc packages.

More importantly, the initramfs scripts provided work with the
 make-kpkg images as well as the official images, and are thus better
 than the script shipped with initramfs-tools themselves, as they offer
 a super set of functionality.

This version of kernel-package also demonstrates how the
 postsinst script communicates with the initramfs scripts so that no
 initramfs is generated in case you do not want it (I personally compile
 all modules in my non-laptop kernel, and thus do not need an
 initramfs).

I have not yet seeded the  env with the maintainer script
 parameter arguments, but I'll put in what Frans suggested unless there
 are objections.

Please take this for a spin. Kick the tires. I need helpe from
 people who run Xen machines, since  I do not use Xen, and would like to
 make the Xen images work better.

    manoj

kernel-package (12.001) experimental; urgency=low

  * This is a major change in functionality; do not upgrade unless you are
prepared for the changes required on target machines.
  * make-kpkg removes and re-creates ./debian on every invocation

This does make the kernel-package far more nimble; we now offer less
surprise to users who did not expect stampts that the kernel-packagge
used to not do duplicate work. Now, if you edit a couple of files in
the kernel source, and run make-kpkg, the kernel will build as
expected. There are no more "version mismatch" errors, and the kernel
version can be modified using localconfig as one desires. With this,
kernel-package can rountinely be used to build kernels out of the git
tree.

The con is that we no longer cater to official kernels, or to anyone who
expected content in ./debian to persist. At some point, there are plans
to implement an overlay directory that will shadow
    /usr/share/kernel-package/ruleset, but that is not yet implemented.
  * Get rid of the facility to patch kernel sources

The patch the kernel facility was adding complexity, and failing to
provide the flexibility required for a generic patching facility. It used
to be useful at one point, but in the modern parlance, witht he
widespread use of distribute version control systems, and various
facilities to manage source and patch them, the built in version was
clunky.  This means the --added-patches option of make-kpkg is gone,
the work-around is to prepare the kernel sources _before_ calling
make-kpkg. 
  * Remove special case code for official kernels

For the longest tine (well, ever since Herbert Xu too over building
kernel images from me), kernel-package has carried specal case code
for official images. This has caused some problems, recently, since
the need to preserve ./debian has caused no end of problems when the
version changed out from under ./debian, or when people wanted to edit
a file and expected kernel-package to do a minimal recompile.

However, sometime in the Etch release cycle, the kernel team
    deprecated kernel-package as the means of building official kernels,
and therefore, a full release cycle later, we can get rid of the
special case rules used for official packages. Also, this allows us to
drop ./debian at teh drop of a hart, and recreate it with an version
that reflects the current state of the kernel sources.
  * No longer ship header debs that create symbolic links in /usr/src,
instead, ship an example shell script that replicated the old
behaviour. This script can then be deployed on the target machines,
and could be a part of a locally created kernel configuration package,
if one needs to deploy the same behavior across a clu

Re: Rejuvenated kernel-package uploaded to unstable, please test

[Michelle Konzack]

Hello Manoj and other Kernel-Maintainers,

Thank you for doing this hard job...
I am ongoing to test the new "kernel-package".

Thanks, Greetings and nice Day/Evening
Michelle Konzack
Systemadministrator
24V Electronic Engineer
Tamay Dogan Network
Debian GNU/Linux Consultant


-- 
Linux-User #280138 with the Linux Counter, http://counter.li.org/
# Debian GNU/Linux Consultant #
Michelle Konzack   Apt. 917  ICQ #328449886
+49/177/935194750, rue de Soultz MSN LinuxMichi
+33/6/61925193 67100 Strasbourg/France   IRC #Debian (irc.icq.com)


signature.pgp
Description: Digital signature

Re: Rejuvenated kernel-package uploaded to unstable, please test

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

Be sure to get kernel-package_11.005_all.deb. The 11.005 fixes a
 critical regression, born of a copy&paste error from late night
 hacking. Sorry for the inconvenience.

manoj
-- 
"Old age and treachery will beat youth and skill every time." a coffee
cup
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>   
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]

Rejuvenated kernel-package uploaded to unstable, please test

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi folks,

A new version of kernel-package has made its way to unstable.
 This is a extensive change, and addresses most of the problems that
 have been plaguing kernel-package, partially thanks to patches provided
 by other folk.

The new version works with the merged x86 code in recent
 kernels, while retaining compatibility with older kernel sources. It
 correctly generates the right set of headers. It is again
 cross-compilation friendly. The postinst no longer runs lilo when it
 thinks there is no other bootloader (it used to detect grub, but not
 grub2). It correctly installs firmware in a versioned location under
 /lib/firmware.

More significantly, the build system has moved to a more
 streamlined, make -j friendly build system While I am not sure of this
 fixes some of the nagging problems we have been facing in recent
 versions of kernel-package, where we used double colon rules, which
 were convenient, sure, but played havoc with ordering of the rules, and
 had to have various band-aids to help out with the ordering. The system
 was rapidly growing complex, with clear indication that it was actually
 faster.

The new target mechanism does away with doublecolon rules, and
 should play better with parrallel compilation. We try to use upstream
 kbuild as far as possible, to reduce churn as the files upstream
 installs change. Some added checks of the Makefile are now in place so
 we retain backwards compatibility. This should improve things lot wrt
 header files.  We also now add dependencies to more packages actually
 required to build kernel images.

We also try to look for the kbuild created KERNELRELEASE
 variable, which is designed to be used by distros to figure out where
 modules are to be loaded from, etc. This should help reduce version
 mismatches. We also prepare the kernel.release file early, to help
 that.

We also refitted to support the new XEN code in mainstream, in
 that the same image can be booted normally or be used as a XEN
 image. This support probably needs to be improved.

The make target dependencies have been extensively reworked, to
 minimize surprises and wasted effort. We also strip modules, based on
 DEB_BUILD_OPTIONS (nostrip).

Extra care is now taken so we do not accidentally remove
 ./debian while cleaning, thanks to upstream helpfully removing ./debian
 when cleaning.  This should prevent dpkg-buildpackage from accidentally
 shooting itself in the foot by removing ./debian as its first action.
 
Finally, the changes have made it possible to create a
 kernel-image straight out of a git working directory, partially because
 the upstream script does not think that the changes kernel-package
 makes to the source make it dirty, and partially because we run the
 kernel.release creation script early, just after patching the
 sources, but before generating the ./debian/changelog, and this,
 abetted by using KERNELRELEASE, ensures that we correctly capture the
 version.

I have also added dependencies to kernel package, the kerel
 source package, the kernel header package, with the basic tools
 required to build a kernel, so by installing the source package, or the
 header package, the user should have most of the things required to
 compile their own kernel.

Anyway, this was a marathon two day hack session, and while I
 have compiled 2.6.25.8 and 2.6.26 several dozen times, I would
 appreciate testing this version, so we may get it into lenny.

manoj
-- 
Dungeons and Dragons is just a lot of Saxon Violence.
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>  
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]

Re: Rebuilding the official Debian 2.6.23 kernel package

[Hugo Vanwoerkom]

Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:

Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:

Hi,

In <2.6.23 kernels this site told you how to rebuild the Debian kernel 
package:


http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html#s-common-official 



In 2.6.23 I can no longer do it. It fails this:

fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen setup-i386-none-686

That flavor no longer exists.

Replacing it with:

fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen setup_i386_none_686

the patching operation fails with:

...
Warning: No version.Debian file, assuming pristine Linux 2.6.23
  (+) OKdebian/version.patch
  (+) OKdebian/kernelvariables.patch
  (+) OKdebian/doc-build-parallel.patch
  (+) OKdebian/scripts-kconfig-reportoldconfig.patch
  (+) OKdebian/powerpc-mkvmlinuz-support-ppc.patch
  (+) OKdebian/powerpc-mkvmlinuz-support-powerpc.patch
  (+) OKdebian/drivers-ata-ata_piix-postpone-pata.patch
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/net/Kconfig.rej
2 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/net/tg3.c.rej
  (+) FAIL  debian/dfsg/drivers-net-tg3-fix-simple.patch
make[1]: *** [debian/stamps/source] Error 1
...

And true enough that tg3.c just is not the same.

Has anybody tried this or am I the first one?



So we will see how the compile goes. But commenting

linux-2.6.23/debian/patches/series/1

the entry

#+ debian/dfsg/drivers-net-tg3-fix-simple.patch

seemed to do the trick.

Also instead of:

fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen setup-i386-none-k7
fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen binary-arch-i386-none-k7

you have to use:

fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen setup_i386_none-686
fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen binary-arch_i386_none_686

but since you are compiling the kernel you can turn K7 on again!




Compiles clean. Installs clean. vmware installs with the 
any-any-update113 patch. Nvidia installs with the patch reported in:

http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=95296&highlight=2.6.23

Purpose of this exercise: to install the ck1 patch for 2.6.23: installs 
clean. Reported here:


http://bhhdoa.org.au/pipermail/ck/2007-November/008466.html

Hugo












--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Rebuilding the official Debian 2.6.23 kernel package

[Hugo Vanwoerkom]

Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:

Hi,

In <2.6.23 kernels this site told you how to rebuild the Debian kernel 
package:


http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html#s-common-official 



In 2.6.23 I can no longer do it. It fails this:

fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen setup-i386-none-686

That flavor no longer exists.

Replacing it with:

fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen setup_i386_none_686

the patching operation fails with:

...
Warning: No version.Debian file, assuming pristine Linux 2.6.23
  (+) OKdebian/version.patch
  (+) OKdebian/kernelvariables.patch
  (+) OKdebian/doc-build-parallel.patch
  (+) OKdebian/scripts-kconfig-reportoldconfig.patch
  (+) OKdebian/powerpc-mkvmlinuz-support-ppc.patch
  (+) OKdebian/powerpc-mkvmlinuz-support-powerpc.patch
  (+) OKdebian/drivers-ata-ata_piix-postpone-pata.patch
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/net/Kconfig.rej
2 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/net/tg3.c.rej
  (+) FAIL  debian/dfsg/drivers-net-tg3-fix-simple.patch
make[1]: *** [debian/stamps/source] Error 1
...

And true enough that tg3.c just is not the same.

Has anybody tried this or am I the first one?



So we will see how the compile goes. But commenting

linux-2.6.23/debian/patches/series/1

the entry

#+ debian/dfsg/drivers-net-tg3-fix-simple.patch

seemed to do the trick.

Also instead of:

fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen setup-i386-none-k7
fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen binary-arch-i386-none-k7

you have to use:

fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen setup_i386_none-686
fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen binary-arch_i386_none_686

but since you are compiling the kernel you can turn K7 on again!

Hugo



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Rebuilding the official Debian 2.6.23 kernel package

[Hugo Vanwoerkom]

Hi,

In <2.6.23 kernels this site told you how to rebuild the Debian kernel 
package:


http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html#s-common-official

In 2.6.23 I can no longer do it. It fails this:

fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen setup-i386-none-686

That flavor no longer exists.

Replacing it with:

fakeroot make -f debian/rules.gen setup_i386_none_686

the patching operation fails with:

...
Warning: No version.Debian file, assuming pristine Linux 2.6.23
  (+) OKdebian/version.patch
  (+) OKdebian/kernelvariables.patch
  (+) OKdebian/doc-build-parallel.patch
  (+) OKdebian/scripts-kconfig-reportoldconfig.patch
  (+) OKdebian/powerpc-mkvmlinuz-support-ppc.patch
  (+) OKdebian/powerpc-mkvmlinuz-support-powerpc.patch
  (+) OKdebian/drivers-ata-ata_piix-postpone-pata.patch
1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/net/Kconfig.rej
2 out of 5 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/net/tg3.c.rej
  (+) FAIL  debian/dfsg/drivers-net-tg3-fix-simple.patch
make[1]: *** [debian/stamps/source] Error 1
...

And true enough that tg3.c just is not the same.

Has anybody tried this or am I the first one?

Hugo





--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Re: nvidia-kernel package: compilation failure with 2.6.21 [RESOLVED]

[Jim McCloskey]

Hugo Vanwoerkom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

|> You can either rebuild the kernel and turn that off (Note: but in
|> that case I had hard hangs in qemu!) *or* use the descriptions 
|> in that page to rebuild the kbuild .deb and install nvidia so it does
|> not mind paravirt.

Just to close out the thread: building a kernel with PARAVIRT_CONFIG turned 
off did indeed resolve the issue. The nvidia-kernel module then compiled and 
installed without difficulty.

Thanks once more to all who helped,

Jim



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: nvidia-kernel package: compilation failure with 2.6.21

[Jim McCloskey]

Hugo Vanwoerkom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

|> Extensively discussed here:
|> http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=90214
|> 
|> The problem is that post 2.6.18 Debian kernels have PARAVIRT_CONFIG 
|> and nvidia does not like that.
|> 
|> You can either rebuild the kernel and turn that off (Note: but in
|> that case I had hard hangs in qemu!) *or* use the descriptions 
|> in that page to rebuild the kbuild .deb and install nvidia so it does
|> not mind paravirt.
|> 
|> You'll hit the problem both with m-a *and* the nvidia installer.

Thanks very much to all of you who responded---all interesting and all
helpful. I've compiled a new kernel with PARAVIRT_CONFIG turned off.
I'll reboot into the new kernel on Monday morning (I need to be at the
keyboard in case something goes wrong) and try again with the nvidia
kernel module.

In the meantime I'm very grateful to you all,

Jim


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: nvidia-kernel package: compilation failure with 2.6.21

[Alan Ianson]

On Sat July 7 2007 05:00:06 am Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> Jim McCloskey wrote:
> > Hello.
> >
> > I did a recent install of Debian etch on a system with an nVidia
> > graphics controller. I used module-assistant to install the nvidia
> > kernel module, and under kernel 2.6.18 from the install, that all
> > worked fine.
> >
> > A few days later, I upgraded to kernel package 2.6.18.2-686 (from
> > lenny) to resolve a problem with the on-board audio controller:
> >
> >  Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) High Definition Audio Controller
> > (rev 01)
> >
> > The kernel upgrade did indeed resolve the problem with the audio
> > controller, but it meant a re-install of the nvidia kernel module. I
> > tried to do that as follows:
> >
> >  % aptitude install nvidia-kernel-common
> >  % module-assistant -i prepare
> >  % module-assistant a-i -t -f nvidia-kernel
> >
> > However, the build failed. The crucial error seems to be this (from
> > /var/cache/modass/nvidia-kernel-source.buildlog.2.6.21-2-686.1183784666):
> >
> > --
> >   LD [M]  /usr/src/modules/nvidia-kernel/nv/nvidia.o
> >   Building modules, stage 2.
> >   MODPOST 1 modules
> > FATAL: modpost: GPL-incompatible module nvidia.ko uses GPL-only symbol
> > 'paravirt_ops' make[4]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
> > make[3]: *** [modules] Error 2
> > make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.21-2-686'
> > NVIDIA: left KBUILD.
> > nvidia.ko failed to build!
> > --
> >
> > The compiler used was gcc-4.1 version 4.1.1 (the kernel seems to have
> > been compiled with 4.1.2), but the error-message seems to suggest that
> > the issue is in some sense legal rather than technical.
> >
> > (There is a similar bug report---No. 430577---against the
> > nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-71xx package.)
> >
> > Has anyone else encountered this problem, or does it come from some
> > stupidity on my part?  I could use the nvidia installer, I suppose,
> > but I'd really prefer to do things the Debian way. Does anyone know of
> > a workaround?
>
> Extensively discussed here:
> http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=90214

Very informative thread, thanks for posting that. After following a few links 
I ended up at http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=419943 .
At the end of that page it says paravirt_ops is no longer a GPL-only export. 
I'm very much looking forward to that filtering down into the debian kernel 
for lenny. I just installed it yesterday and it's ready to go but gdm won't 
fire up, I think that's an x problem though but I'll switch over to the nv 
driver for now until I can get whatever needs sorting sorted.

> The problem is that post 2.6.18 Debian kernels have PARAVIRT_CONFIG and
> nvidia does not like that.
>
> You can either rebuild the kernel and turn that off (Note: but in that
> case I had hard hangs in qemu!) *or* use the descriptions in that page
> to rebuild the kbuild .deb and install nvidia so it does not mind paravirt.
>
> You'll hit the problem both with m-a *and* the nvidia installer.
>
> Hugo



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: nvidia-kernel package: compilation failure with 2.6.21

[Hugo Vanwoerkom]

Jim McCloskey wrote:

Hello.

I did a recent install of Debian etch on a system with an nVidia
graphics controller. I used module-assistant to install the nvidia
kernel module, and under kernel 2.6.18 from the install, that all
worked fine.

A few days later, I upgraded to kernel package 2.6.18.2-686 (from
lenny) to resolve a problem with the on-board audio controller:

 Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) High Definition Audio Controller (rev 
01)

The kernel upgrade did indeed resolve the problem with the audio
controller, but it meant a re-install of the nvidia kernel module. I
tried to do that as follows:

 % aptitude install nvidia-kernel-common
 % module-assistant -i prepare
 % module-assistant a-i -t -f nvidia-kernel

However, the build failed. The crucial error seems to be this (from 
/var/cache/modass/nvidia-kernel-source.buildlog.2.6.21-2-686.1183784666):


--
  LD [M]  /usr/src/modules/nvidia-kernel/nv/nvidia.o
  Building modules, stage 2.
  MODPOST 1 modules
FATAL: modpost: GPL-incompatible module nvidia.ko uses GPL-only symbol 
'paravirt_ops'
make[4]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
make[3]: *** [modules] Error 2
make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.21-2-686'
NVIDIA: left KBUILD.
nvidia.ko failed to build!
--

The compiler used was gcc-4.1 version 4.1.1 (the kernel seems to have
been compiled with 4.1.2), but the error-message seems to suggest that
the issue is in some sense legal rather than technical.

(There is a similar bug report---No. 430577---against the 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-71xx
package.)

Has anyone else encountered this problem, or does it come from some
stupidity on my part?  I could use the nvidia installer, I suppose,
but I'd really prefer to do things the Debian way. Does anyone know of
a workaround?



Extensively discussed here:
http://www.nvnews.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=90214

The problem is that post 2.6.18 Debian kernels have PARAVIRT_CONFIG and 
nvidia does not like that.


You can either rebuild the kernel and turn that off (Note: but in that 
case I had hard hangs in qemu!) *or* use the descriptions in that page 
to rebuild the kbuild .deb and install nvidia so it does not mind paravirt.


You'll hit the problem both with m-a *and* the nvidia installer.

Hugo














--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: nvidia-kernel package:

[pinniped]

Do you use paravirtualization?  If not, recompile a kernel with no 
virtualization support.  The problem here is that the NVidia driver is trying 
to use a module symbol which has been declared for use with GPL drivers only.  
If I remember correctly that means EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(somevariable) is used in 
the code which is causing the problem.  So options to try are:

1. remove virtualization and try to compile again
2. find the offending symbol in the kernel source and change EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL 
to EXPORT_SYMBOL and recompile the kernel.

Since there are already so many drivers for Linux and the proprietary drivers 
are usually a nuisance and cause problems (which of course are blamed on kernel 
developers), there is an ongoing trend to exclude non-GPL drivers from loading. 
 Of course you can imagine that as module writers use EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL more, 
there will be more proprietary driver failures.  In the future there is no 
guarantee that EXPORT_SYMBOL will not actually be the same as EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL.



--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: nvidia-kernel package: compilation failure with 2.6.21

[Alan Ianson]

On Fri July 6 2007 11:19:55 pm Jim McCloskey wrote:
> Hello.
>
> I did a recent install of Debian etch on a system with an nVidia
> graphics controller. I used module-assistant to install the nvidia
> kernel module, and under kernel 2.6.18 from the install, that all
> worked fine.
>
> A few days later, I upgraded to kernel package 2.6.18.2-686 (from
> lenny) to resolve a problem with the on-board audio controller:
>
>  Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) High Definition Audio Controller
> (rev 01)
>
> The kernel upgrade did indeed resolve the problem with the audio
> controller, but it meant a re-install of the nvidia kernel module. I
> tried to do that as follows:
>
>  % aptitude install nvidia-kernel-common
>  % module-assistant -i prepare
>  % module-assistant a-i -t -f nvidia-kernel
>
> However, the build failed. The crucial error seems to be this (from
> /var/cache/modass/nvidia-kernel-source.buildlog.2.6.21-2-686.1183784666):
>
> --
>   LD [M]  /usr/src/modules/nvidia-kernel/nv/nvidia.o
>   Building modules, stage 2.
>   MODPOST 1 modules
> FATAL: modpost: GPL-incompatible module nvidia.ko uses GPL-only symbol
> 'paravirt_ops' make[4]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
> make[3]: *** [modules] Error 2
> make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.21-2-686'
> NVIDIA: left KBUILD.
> nvidia.ko failed to build!
> --
>
> The compiler used was gcc-4.1 version 4.1.1 (the kernel seems to have
> been compiled with 4.1.2), but the error-message seems to suggest that
> the issue is in some sense legal rather than technical.
>
> (There is a similar bug report---No. 430577---against the
> nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-71xx package.)
>
> Has anyone else encountered this problem, or does it come from some
> stupidity on my part?  

I've seen this too.

> I could use the nvidia installer, I suppose, 
> but I'd really prefer to do things the Debian way. Does anyone know of
> a workaround?


I believe the only way to get the nvidia module loaded is to build your own 
kernel with "paravirt_ops" (or something there abouts) disabled.

I haven't built my own kernel since woody and I forget how to do it.. :)

Googleing paravirt_ops, nvidia, debian will likely be helpful.


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

nvidia-kernel package: compilation failure with 2.6.21

[Jim McCloskey]

Hello.

I did a recent install of Debian etch on a system with an nVidia
graphics controller. I used module-assistant to install the nvidia
kernel module, and under kernel 2.6.18 from the install, that all
worked fine.

A few days later, I upgraded to kernel package 2.6.18.2-686 (from
lenny) to resolve a problem with the on-board audio controller:

 Intel Corporation 82801G (ICH7 Family) High Definition Audio Controller (rev 
01)

The kernel upgrade did indeed resolve the problem with the audio
controller, but it meant a re-install of the nvidia kernel module. I
tried to do that as follows:

 % aptitude install nvidia-kernel-common
 % module-assistant -i prepare
 % module-assistant a-i -t -f nvidia-kernel

However, the build failed. The crucial error seems to be this (from 
/var/cache/modass/nvidia-kernel-source.buildlog.2.6.21-2-686.1183784666):

--
  LD [M]  /usr/src/modules/nvidia-kernel/nv/nvidia.o
  Building modules, stage 2.
  MODPOST 1 modules
FATAL: modpost: GPL-incompatible module nvidia.ko uses GPL-only symbol 
'paravirt_ops'
make[4]: *** [__modpost] Error 1
make[3]: *** [modules] Error 2
make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.21-2-686'
NVIDIA: left KBUILD.
nvidia.ko failed to build!
--

The compiler used was gcc-4.1 version 4.1.1 (the kernel seems to have
been compiled with 4.1.2), but the error-message seems to suggest that
the issue is in some sense legal rather than technical.

(There is a similar bug report---No. 430577---against the 
nvidia-graphics-drivers-legacy-71xx
package.)

Has anyone else encountered this problem, or does it come from some
stupidity on my part?  I could use the nvidia installer, I suppose,
but I'd really prefer to do things the Debian way. Does anyone know of
a workaround?

Thanks very much in advance,

Jim


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Debian kernel packaging: changes forthcoming in kernel-package 11.x

[Manoj Srivastava]

Hi,

[Please follow up on [EMAIL PROTECTED]

The postinst script of the kernel image packages is huge -- but
 then, it comes from  a tradition of a postinst that would ask you if you
 wanted to put the new kernel on a boot floppy, format and initialize a
 new floppy, and create a bootable floppy from the newly installed
 image.  Thankfully, the format-and-create-boot-floppy functionality was
 removed from the postinst, but still a number of things remain hard-coded
 into the postinst.
Apart from the fact that this functionality has been the cause
 of much teeth gnashing and many bug reports,  since the complexity of
 the logic is one of the most bug-prone bits of the image postinst, it
 also makes it harder to come up with alternatives to the algorithms or
 to tweak the behavior -- since one needs to tweak kernel-package,
 re-compile the kernel, and install it, to see new behavior.  For
 example, what if I want to create symlinks for the three most recent
 2.4, 2.6, and Xen images? It should be a simple task, but currently it
 is not.

With /etc/kernel/*.d directories, we have a means of having the
 sysadmin installing arbitrary bits of code  in these directories, to
 do whatever they wish to post process the image so installed.

So I plan on moving the symlink handling out of the postinst.
 Instead  of the postinst creating the symlinks, people can drop in a
 script that does symlink handling for them.  This should not be a big
 deal for most people now, since update-grub does not  really need the
 symlinks anyway.

Secondly, the postinst will no longer run the boot-loader (it
 does not do  so for grub right now). Again, a simple run_loader script
 can be put in place in the /etc/kernel/ directories, for people who
 need them.

I think the packages affected might be lilo, quik, palo,
 vmelilo, zipl, and elilo.  These packages might want to drop in a
 script that runs on install/remove into /etc/kernel; examples should be
 easy to provide.

Third, I want to do away with the postinst deciding which initrd
 generator to run. The current initramfs packages already have commands
 to create the initrd; and these packages can again dump in scripts to
 run the initrd generator in /etc/kernel/*.d.  This is the chance that
 initrd generator people have to fix the interface that they have been
 complaining about.

Finally, I want to have kernel-package come closer to the
 version numbering scheme that the official kernel images have been
 using, complete with native flavour support, but this can be dealt with
 in a separate thread.

The critical issues are:
 a) How to configure which one of competing boot-loader scripts get run,
if more than one boot loaders are installed
 b) Which initramfs generator gets run, if we have more than one
installed. 
 c) What information would the scripts need, apart from kernel version,
and the location of the image?
 d) How do we transition the changes -- wait for all involved packages
to create a changed version, and upload all packages at once in a
staged fashion, or just stagger it into Sid?

The first two issues are specific instances of the general
 problem of how to configure any set of cooperating scripts; and a
 solution similar to those used for init scripts can be adopted
 (/etc/default/script-or-package-name)

So, the next step should be to create example symlink,
 boot-loader invocation, and initrd invocation scripts for people to dump
 into /etc/kernel.  I was thinking of also including these examples into
 the kernel image  packages, even if there is some duplication on disk
 of these small examples, at least while the transition is still going
 on.

manoj
-- 
The PINK SOCKS were ORIGINALLY from 1952!!  But they went to MARS around
1953!!
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
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]

Re: two version numbers on a kernel package?

[Andrew Sackville-West]

On Thu, Jan 11, 2007 at 03:58:08PM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 15:26 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 08:43:31PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > > 
> > > > What does it mean when there are two version numbers on a package.
> > > 
> > > The -number is the Debian patchlevel:  major.minor.patch-debpatch
> > > 
> > So in 
> >   linux-image-2.6.17-2-486_2.6.17-9_i386.deb
> 
> It is Linux Image 2.6.17-2-486 (that is the package name)
> 
> Version is 2.6.17-9  (basically the source version) for the i386
> architecture.
> 
> Hope that helps.
> 
> Here is the DPKG output(sorry for the LONG LINES (made as short as
> possible)
> 
> |/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: 
> uppercase=bad)
> ||/ Name  VersionDescription
> +++-=-==-==
> ii  linux-image-2.6.18-1-k7   2.6.18-3   Linux 2.6.18 image on AMD K7
> ii  linux-image-2.6.18-2-k7   2.6.18-5   Linux 2.6.18 image on AMD K7
> ii  linux-image-2.6.18-3-k7   2.6.18-8   Linux 2.6.18 image on AMD K7
> 

--^^
this is the package name, which is incremented with each new package
release.




this is the kernel version number with major.minor.patch-debpatch. The
deb patches are not sequential, I assume, because they may not
necessarily release each patch level, or the package versions get
upgraded without a package version increase (why, I don't know. maybe
because the deb patch is not significant enough to call it a new
version of the package). 

So you might install linux-image-2.6.18-1-k7 and get a kernel version
2.6.18-1. Then later, deb will upgrade that package, but not
signifantly enough to change the package version number. So you do an
apt* upgrade and the package linux-image-2.6.18-1-k7 gets upgraded
(we've all seen this -- "you are installing a new version of the same
kernel, you must reboot") so that now you are running the same
package, but the kernel version associated with it is 2.6.18-2. At
some point the put out a whole new kernel package version --
linux-image-2.6.18-2-k7 with a new kernel version, say 2.6.18-3 and so
forth. 

this is all a guess, and the numbers are made up.

A


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: two version numbers on a kernel package?

[Greg Folkert]

On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 15:26 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 08:43:31PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > 
> > > What does it mean when there are two version numbers on a package.
> > 
> > The -number is the Debian patchlevel:  major.minor.patch-debpatch
> > 
> So in 
>   linux-image-2.6.17-2-486_2.6.17-9_i386.deb

It is Linux Image 2.6.17-2-486 (that is the package name)

Version is 2.6.17-9  (basically the source version) for the i386
architecture.

Hope that helps.

Here is the DPKG output(sorry for the LONG LINES (made as short as
possible)

[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg -l \
linux-image-2.6.18-1-k7 \
linux-image-2.6.18-2-k7 \
linux-image-2.6.18-3-k7
Desired=Unknown/Install/Remove/Purge/Hold
| Status=Not/Installed/Config-files/Unpacked/Failed-config/Half-installed
|/ Err?=(none)/Hold/Reinst-required/X=both-problems (Status,Err: uppercase=bad)
||/ Name  VersionDescription
+++-=-==-==
ii  linux-image-2.6.18-1-k7   2.6.18-3   Linux 2.6.18 image on AMD K7
ii  linux-image-2.6.18-2-k7   2.6.18-5   Linux 2.6.18 image on AMD K7
ii  linux-image-2.6.18-3-k7   2.6.18-8   Linux 2.6.18 image on AMD K7


So you can see what I am talking about, I just did a dpkg -l
-- 
greg, [EMAIL PROTECTED]

The technology that is
Stronger, better, faster:  Linux


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: two version numbers on a kernel package?

[hendrik]

On Wed, Jan 10, 2007 at 08:43:31PM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> 
> > What does it mean when there are two version numbers on a package.
> 
> The -number is the Debian patchlevel:  major.minor.patch-debpatch
> 
So in 
  linux-image-2.6.17-2-486_2.6.17-9_i386.deb
is the debpatch number
-2-486_2.6.17-9_i386
or
-2
or
-9_i386
or
-2-486
or
-9
?

-- hendrik


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: two version numbers on a kernel package?

[Paul Johnson]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> What does it mean when there are two version numbers on a package.

The -number is the Debian patchlevel:  major.minor.patch-debpatch



-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

two version numbers on a kernel package?

[hendrik]

What does it mean when there are two version numbers on a package.  For 
example, one kernel package in the etch installer RC1 is

linux-image-2.6.17-2-486_2.6.17-9_i386.deb

Now clearly the 2.6.17-2-486

is part of the package name, making it possible to install more than one 
kernel package, should one decide to.

But then there's another version number, presumably to identify 
different patch levels as Debian makes its own adaptations to the 
kernel.

I would have expected this to result in versions like 
  linux-image-2.6.17-2-486_3_i386.deb
for the third patch to the upstream kernel.

But instead we get 
  linux-image-2.6.17-2-486_2.6.17-9_i386.deb
suggesting that there is more to the story.  What is the relationship 
between the 2.6.17-9 and the 2.6.17-2?  2.6.17-9 would offhand seem to 
be much later than 2.6.17-2.

For example, if someone were to speak of a 
bug or feature introduced in the 2.6.17-3, would I expect it to be 
present or absent in 2.6.17-2-486_2.6.17-9_i386?

Presumably, all there versions would precede 2.6.18, though.

-- hendrik


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: proprietary kernel modules w/ kernel-package?

[Kit Peters]

Please excuse the lateness of my reply.

I don't think this is going to work for me.  A wrinkle that I failed
to mention earlier is that I'm compiling a custom kernel for these
machines, and the driver needs to be compiled against that kernel.
Ideally, I'd like to use make-kpkg to generate the custom kernel
(which I'm doing already) and the 3M touchscreen kernel module.  I can
separate out the rest of the 3M utilities.

Owing to the lateness of my reply, I'll also mention my original question:


For my job, I have to install 3M's proprietary touchscreen drivers (distributed
as an SRPM) for MicroTouch USB touchscreens.  I am well aware that these
screens are supported natively in the kernel; however, my experience with
the in-kernel support (as of 2.6.12.3) for these touchscreens has been that the
screens rapidly go out of calibration.  Thus 3M's proprietary driver, which
works tolerably well, and includes a calibration utility.

Previously, I had the 3M driver working under 2.6.12.3 and Slackware.  The
machines for this project, however, are now all to run on Debian, and we
would like to "Debianize" things as much as possible.  This means that I wish
to wrap the 3M driver in a .deb.  What is the best way to go about this?  Note
that I plan to compile kernels on a fast machine that runs the same version
of Debian, but is otherwise dissimilar to the project machines.



KP


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: proprietary kernel modules w/ kernel-package?

[Felipe Sateler]

Kit Peters wrote:

> This means that I wish to wrap the 3M driver in a .deb. What is the best
> way to go about this? 

I'd proceed as normal (that is, build the RPMs like you did on the other
machines, debian has the rpm utility), but instead of installing the driver
through rpm, use alien to generate a deb package, and then install the
debian package. 


-- 

Felipe Sateler


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

proprietary kernel modules w/ kernel-package?

[Kit Peters]

For my job, I have to install 3M's proprietary touchscreen drivers (distributed as an SRPM) for MicroTouch USB touchscreens.  I am well aware that these screens are supported natively in the kernel; however, my experience with the in-kernel support (as of 
2.6.12.3) for these touchscreens has been that the screens rapidly go out of calibration.  Thus 3M's proprietary driver, which works tolerably well, and includes a calibration utility.  
Previously, I had the 3M driver working under 2.6.12.3 and Slackware.  The machines for this project, however, are now all to run on Debian, and we would like to "Debianize" things as much as possible.  This means that I wish to wrap the 3M driver in a .deb.  What is the best way to go about this?  Note that I plan to compile kernels on a fast machine that runs the same version of Debian, but is otherwise dissimilar to the project machines.
Kit Peters

Re: Problem with kernel-package

[Kit Peters]

I have solved my problem.  I installed fakeroot, then modified ~/.kernel-pkg.conf to use it (1).  Kernel compiles successfully, and .debs are generated in the parent directory ("~/src" in my case.)  I installed the linux-image .deb on the target machine successfully as well.
(1) I added a line: "root_cmd := fakeroot" to ~/.kernel-pkg.conf.KPOn 6/22/06, James Westby <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On (22/06/06 21:07), Kit Peters wrote:> On 6/22/06, James Westby <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> >It is oft recommended to use fakeroot rather that a real root command> >for compiling.> Hm. I've never used fakeroot for anything.  How would I compile a kernel in
> fakeroot?aptitude install fakeroots/sudo/fakeroot/ in your command.That should be it. You then don't have to enter your password, and thereis less chance of something going catastrophically wrong.
> >http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=359832> No, I'm using kernel-package 10.047.It might be a re-occurence of a similar bug.
I am using the same version and compiled the debian 2.6.17.rc3 packagesa couple of days ago. Perhaps it could be the vanilla source that iscausing it. (Though I doubt it).> Well, I'll try the make-kpkg clean, but I'm not sanguine about the outcome.
Neither am I.James--  James Westby  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://jameswestby.net/--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Problem with kernel-package

[James Westby]

On (22/06/06 21:07), Kit Peters wrote:
> On 6/22/06, James Westby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >It is oft recommended to use fakeroot rather that a real root command
> >for compiling.
> Hm. I've never used fakeroot for anything.  How would I compile a kernel in
> fakeroot?

aptitude install fakeroot
s/sudo/fakeroot/ in your command.

That should be it. You then don't have to enter your password, and there
is less chance of something going catastrophically wrong.

> >http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=359832
> No, I'm using kernel-package 10.047.

It might be a re-occurence of a similar bug. 

I am using the same version and compiled the debian 2.6.17.rc3 packages
a couple of days ago. Perhaps it could be the vanilla source that is
causing it. (Though I doubt it).

> Well, I'll try the make-kpkg clean, but I'm not sanguine about the outcome.

Neither am I.

James

-- 
  James Westby
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  http://jameswestby.net/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Problem with kernel-package

[Kit Peters]

On 6/22/06, James Westby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have configured the kernel via menuconfig.  Kernel sources are at> $HOME/src/linux-2.6.17.1/.  I execute 'CC=gcc-4.1 make-kpkg --pgpsign> 
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --rootcmd sudo --revision 1.0 --append-to-version "-pt5500" buildpackage'.It is oft recommended to use fakeroot rather that a real root commandfor compiling.
Hm. I've never used fakeroot for anything.  How would I compile a kernel in fakeroot?
You neglected to mention the version of kernel-package you are using. Isithttp://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=359832that you are seeing?
No, I'm using kernel-package 10.047. >> My kernel .config is attached.  Can anyone shed some light on this matter?
>I saw this problem when trying to setCONFIG_LOCALVERSIONbut you are not doing this. It can also look a bit like this (but rightat the start) if you don't make-kpkg clean first.
Well, I'll try the make-kpkg clean, but I'm not sanguine about the outcome.thanks,KP

Re: Problem with kernel-package

[James Westby]

On (22/06/06 20:42), Kit Peters wrote:
> I'm trying to compile kernel 2.6.17.1 from the vanilla sources at 
> kernel.org.
> As this kernel is for a specific machine, I want to append a note to the
> kernel version to reflect that fact.  Normally, I would do this from within
> $KERNEL_SOURCE_DIR/.config, but as I'm trying to keep this machine as
> "debianized" as possible (by which I mean installing everything via apt, and
> creating my own debs when necessary) I'm using kernel-package.
> 
> I have configured the kernel via menuconfig.  Kernel sources are at
> $HOME/src/linux-2.6.17.1/.  I execute 'CC=gcc-4.1 make-kpkg --pgpsign
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> --rootcmd sudo --revision 1.0 --append-to-version "-pt5500" buildpackage'.

It is oft recommended to use fakeroot rather that a real root command
for compiling.

> The kernel appears to build successfully, and sudo prompts me for my
> password to execute 'debian/rules binary'.  At this point, however, it all
> goes wahooni-shaped:
> 

You neglected to mention the version of kernel-package you are using. Is
it
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=359832
that you are seeing?

> 
> My kernel .config is attached.  Can anyone shed some light on this matter?
> 

I saw this problem when trying to set 
CONFIG_LOCALVERSION
but you are not doing this. It can also look a bit like this (but right
at the start) if you don't make-kpkg clean first.


James


-- 
  James Westby
  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  http://jameswestby.net/


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Problem with kernel-package

[Kit Peters]

I'm trying to compile kernel 2.6.17.1 from the vanilla sources at 
kernel.org.  As this kernel is for a specific machine, I want to append a note to the kernel version to reflect that fact.  Normally, I would do this from within $KERNEL_SOURCE_DIR/.config, but as I'm trying to keep this machine as "debianized" as possible (by which I mean installing everything via apt, and creating my own debs when necessary) I'm using kernel-package.
I have configured the kernel via menuconfig.  Kernel sources are at $HOME/src/linux-2.6.17.1/.  I execute 'CC=
gcc-4.1 make-kpkg --pgpsign [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 --rootcmd sudo --revision 1.0 --append-to-version "-pt5500" buildpackage'.  The kernel appears to build successfully, and sudo prompts me for my password to execute 'debian/rules  binary'.  At this point, however, it all goes wahooni-shaped:
== making target BIN-common [new prereqs: testdir] making target POST-BUILD-indep-stamp [new prereqs: ] making target INST-common [new prereqs: testdir] making target BUILD-common [new prereqs: testdir]==
The changelog says we are creating 2.6.17.1-pt5500However, I thought the version is 2.6.17.1exit 4make: *** [sanity_check] Error 4
make: *** [stamp-buildpackage] Error 2
My kernel .config is attached.  Can anyone shed some light on this matter?Thanks in advance.Kit Peters



config.gz
Description: GNU Zip compressed data

Re: debian kernel package for ubuntu

[Felix C. Stegerman]

* Gregory Soyez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-05-26 18:32]:
> I'm trying to help someone rebuilding its kernel from sources. Since
> I do not have physical access to the machine, I planned to build a
> custom debian package linux-image using make-kpkg on my own debian
> box and let her install the package with dpkg on her ubuntu box.  So
> my question is simply to know if installing a debian kernel package
> on ubuntu is feasible or if it will lead to problems ?

I've done exactly that once or twice without any problems.  Of course
YMMV.


- Felix

-- 
Felix C. Stegerman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

"Any sufficiently advanced bug is indistinguishable from a feature."
 -- R. Kulawiec


pgppOXnxqln7y.pgp
Description: PGP signature

debian kernel package for ubuntu

[Gregory Soyez]

Hi all ...

I'm trying to help someone rebuilding its kernel from sources. Since I do not 
have physical access to the machine, I planned to build a custom debian 
package linux-image using make-kpkg on my own debian box and let her install 
the package with dpkg on her ubuntu box.
So my question is simply to know if installing a debian kernel package on 
ubuntu is feasible or if it will lead to problems ?

TIA for any help...
Gregor


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Problems with new testing kernel package

[Angelo Bertolli]

After installing kernel 2.6.15 on my laptop, my laptop suddenly won't  
boot from that kernel. It doesn't even get to init. It seems to not be 
able to find the gzip module on startup. I wrote down the errors since 
all I get is BusyBox when I boot:


... some hardware detection stuff here ...
Begin:  Mounting root file system ...
Begin:  Running /scripts/local-top ...
Done.
Begin:  Running /scripts/local-premount
Attempting manual resume
Done.
FATAL:  Module gzip not found
mount:  Mounting /dev/hda3 on /root failed:  No such device


After that it can't find /sys or /proc, and in the end says there's no 
/sbin/init.  And here's the weird thing:  I can mount the root filesystem by hand and simply chroot over, and run the scripts in init.d to get things running.

So what's going on?  What do I need the gzip module for anyway?

At first I thought it was something wrong with initramfs-tools because if I 
install/reinstall a previous kernel like 2.6.12, that kernel becomes unbootable 
as well.
But honestly, I'm not really that savvy about initramfs-tools and initrd-tools, 
and what the differences are.

The other weird thing is that I don't have this problem at all on my desktop.

I don't know if this is related, but I noticed that there are no more -386 
kernels, only -486 in the repository.

Can anyone give me a clue as to what the problem is?  I'm holding onto an old 
kernel for dear life now, but I know I can't do this forever.

Angelo





--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

pbm with kernel-package

[Brice Méalier]

Hello

I built a new kernel using kernel-package. I installed the source for it
and uncompressed it.

I used module-assistant for building ndiswrapper and realtime-lsm. Twice
I got the message:

Warning, /usr/src/kernel-source-2.6.12.4.tuxbox seems to contain
unconfigured kernel source.


Effectively there is not .config in this directory. Moreover looking at
/lib/modules/2.6.12.4.tuxbox reveals me that the 2 symlinks in it (build
and source) are pointing at the directory in which I built the kernel
(/home/brice/sources/kernel/linux-2.6.12.4)

For information I use the following command to build my packages:

make-kpkg --rootcmd fakeroot --append-to-version=.tuxbox
--revision=2.6.12.4 --initrd kernel_image kernel_source kernel_headers
kernel_doc


What can be wrong in my way of building my kernel-packages?


Best regards,


-- 
Brice Méalier
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux user nb. 372699
Debian GNU/Linux testing
-
"Unix IS user friendly, it is just selective about who his friends are"


-- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: How can I make a kernel package that is _identical_ to those available for download?

[Paul E Condon]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 09:22:22PM +1000, R G Cottrell wrote:
> I'm back after getting some sleep.
> 
> Paul E Condon wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 01:45:46PM +1000, R G Cottrell wrote:
> > 
> >
> >>Paul E Condon wrote:
> >>
> >>   
> >>
> >>>On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 12:17:44PM +1000, R G Cottrell wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>>Hi folks,
> >>>>
> >>>>I asked this on debian-kernel about 8 hours ago but didn't
> >>>>get any replies.
> >>>>
> >>>>I've tried about half a dozen times over the last year to compile
> >>>>a working kernel for my old 233MHz machine.  I thought I might
> >>>>have had a defective processor (a K6) but I've changed it to a
> >>>>genuine Intel Pentium and still had no success.  I can
> >>>>successfully install one of the precompiled kernel images,
> >>>>but compiling one on my box has failed so far.  At one point I
> >>>>filed a bug report but Herbert Xu was unable/unwilling to help.
> >>>>
> >>>>I am currently running RC1 of sarge with a 2.4.27 kernel that I 
> >>>>downloaded as a kernel image, but I've previously tried with
> >>>>3.0r1 with 2.4.18 and other 2.4.x kernels, as well as an early
> >>>>2.6.x kernel source.
> >>>>
> >>>>I now have:
> >>>>
> >>>> kernel-source-2.4.27_2.4.27-6_all.deb (30M)
> >>>>
> >>>>I thought I knew what to do with this, but my past failures in
> >>>>compiling kernels on this box make me wary.
> >>>>
> >>>>I also have
> >>>>
> >>>> kernel-image-2.4.27_2.4.27-6.tar.gz (95K)
> >>>>
> >>>>but I can't understand what I'm supposed to do with it.
> >>>>I've unpacked it but it seems to be for those who already
> >>>>know how it works - there's no readme or help I can see.
> >>>>  
> >>>>I also have:
> >>>>
> >>>> kernel-build-2.4.27_2.4.27-6_i386.deb (8K)
> >>>>
> >>>>but I don't really know what to do with it either.
> >>>>
> >>>>I do have kernel-package installed.
> >>>>
> >>>>As far as I can tell, the latest testing kernel image for Pentium is:
> >>>>
> >>>> kernel-image-2.4.27-1-586tsc_2.4.27-6_i386.deb (11.5M)
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> :-( Not any more.  I wonder if I'll run into the compile-time bug described
> for the -6 version.  We'll see.
> 
> >>>>What commands do I need to issue in order to generate a .deb that is
> >>>>_identical_ to that?  I assume I have to use make-kpkg, and it probably
> >>>>depends on the precise version of the compiler.
> >>>>
> >>>> 
> >>>>
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>The Debian way really does work. I suggest that you stick with it.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>I'd certainly prefer to be able to do it the Debian way.
> >>
> >>   
> >>
> >>>You use make-kpkg as your main tool. Making a kernel package that is
> >>>_identical_ to the precompiled package that you have already
> >>>downloaded is unwise. You need, at least, to change the
> >>>version/rev.number or something so that your computer can distinguish
> >>>between the two (and so that you can distinguish between the two in
> >>>order to tell whether or not you have succeeded) 
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>Well, I was planning to rename the original, downloaded kernel-image, 
> >>after
> >>verifying that it would boot my machine.  It should.  I'm currently 
> >>running
> >>on the  -2 suffixed kernel, so the -6 should work too, I hope.
> >>
> >>   
> >>
> >>>The instructions for
> >>>setting up this change are in man page (I think). Choose an ID string
> >>>that includes something personal, such as you initials. 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>I think I see how to do this, now that I've been directed to:
> >>
> >>http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/reference/ch-kernel.en.html
&g

Re: How can I make a kernel package that is _identical_ to those available for download?

[R G Cottrell]

I'm back after getting some sleep.
Paul E Condon wrote:
On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 01:45:46PM +1000, R G Cottrell wrote:
 

Paul E Condon wrote:
   

On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 12:17:44PM +1000, R G Cottrell wrote:
 

Hi folks,
I asked this on debian-kernel about 8 hours ago but didn't
get any replies.
I've tried about half a dozen times over the last year to compile
a working kernel for my old 233MHz machine.  I thought I might
have had a defective processor (a K6) but I've changed it to a
genuine Intel Pentium and still had no success.  I can
successfully install one of the precompiled kernel images,
but compiling one on my box has failed so far.  At one point I
filed a bug report but Herbert Xu was unable/unwilling to help.
I am currently running RC1 of sarge with a 2.4.27 kernel that I 
downloaded as a kernel image, but I've previously tried with
3.0r1 with 2.4.18 and other 2.4.x kernels, as well as an early
2.6.x kernel source.

I now have:
 kernel-source-2.4.27_2.4.27-6_all.deb (30M)
I thought I knew what to do with this, but my past failures in
compiling kernels on this box make me wary.
I also have
 kernel-image-2.4.27_2.4.27-6.tar.gz (95K)
but I can't understand what I'm supposed to do with it.
I've unpacked it but it seems to be for those who already
know how it works - there's no readme or help I can see.

I also have:
 kernel-build-2.4.27_2.4.27-6_i386.deb (8K)
but I don't really know what to do with it either.
I do have kernel-package installed.
As far as I can tell, the latest testing kernel image for Pentium is:
 kernel-image-2.4.27-1-586tsc_2.4.27-6_i386.deb (11.5M)
   

:-( Not any more.  I wonder if I'll run into the compile-time bug described
for the -6 version.  We'll see.
What commands do I need to issue in order to generate a .deb that is
_identical_ to that?  I assume I have to use make-kpkg, and it probably
depends on the precise version of the compiler.
 

   

The Debian way really does work. I suggest that you stick with it.
 

I'd certainly prefer to be able to do it the Debian way.
   

You use make-kpkg as your main tool. Making a kernel package that is
_identical_ to the precompiled package that you have already
downloaded is unwise. You need, at least, to change the
version/rev.number or something so that your computer can distinguish
between the two (and so that you can distinguish between the two in
order to tell whether or not you have succeeded) 

 

Well, I was planning to rename the original, downloaded kernel-image, after
verifying that it would boot my machine.  It should.  I'm currently running
on the  -2 suffixed kernel, so the -6 should work too, I hope.
   

The instructions for
setting up this change are in man page (I think). Choose an ID string
that includes something personal, such as you initials. 

 

I think I see how to do this, now that I've been directed to:
http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/reference/ch-kernel.en.html
   

Then copy the config file of the prepackaged kernel from /boot into
the source tree under /usr, and follow the steps in the man page.
 

Makes sense.
   

Making a near identical copy of a Debian kernel package is a good
training exercise, and good first step. If it fails, you know that
your new kernel is not failing because of a poor choise of kernel
config options, you are using the ones that you know work for your
hardware. After you have succeeded at this exercise, you can start
tweeking the config parms and recompiling.
HTH
 

The point of making one that is byte-for-byte identical to the downloaded
kernel-image is to check for subtle errors.  If I get a kernel-image that is
similar but not identical, it would be difficult to rule out user error if
the thing doesn't in fact boot.  If I can create one that is identical, 
then
customising it should be a snap.
   

The kernel image (i.e. the actual file that is used to load the kernel
into RAM) contains its own name, as internal data. You will have a
muddle if you try to have two kernel images on your harddisk that have
the same name. If you have an image whose name is different from what
it thinks it is named you will also have a muddle. Think of a
different way of verifying that you have succeeded. 

Surely it can't hurt to have an identical file sitting around on the 
hard drive.
I can go back to booting the 2.4.26 kernel and avoid any problem with the
modules, by scrubbing the 2.4.27 modules before installing any modules I
compile.

If you create a
new kernel image package with a new name, but using the same config
options, and then install this new package you will have a new config
file in /boot which will have your new name and will contain the
options selections that were used to produce it. Diff of this against
the one that was already there is one check that you can do. But, diff
of the kernel images will surely fail to show identity. Think of something

Re: How can I make a kernel package that is _identical_ to those available for download?

[Paul E Condon]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 01:45:46PM +1000, R G Cottrell wrote:
> Paul E Condon wrote:
> 
> >On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 12:17:44PM +1000, R G Cottrell wrote:
> > 
> >
> >>Hi folks,
> >>
> >>I asked this on debian-kernel about 8 hours ago but didn't
> >>get any replies.
> >>
> >>I've tried about half a dozen times over the last year to compile
> >>a working kernel for my old 233MHz machine.  I thought I might
> >>have had a defective processor (a K6) but I've changed it to a
> >>genuine Intel Pentium and still had no success.  I can
> >>successfully install one of the precompiled kernel images,
> >>but compiling one on my box has failed so far.  At one point I
> >>filed a bug report but Herbert Xu was unable/unwilling to help.
> >>
> >>I am currently running RC1 of sarge with a 2.4.27 kernel that I 
> >>downloaded as a kernel image, but I've previously tried with
> >>3.0r1 with 2.4.18 and other 2.4.x kernels, as well as an early
> >>2.6.x kernel source.
> >>
> >>I now have:
> >>
> >>   kernel-source-2.4.27_2.4.27-6_all.deb (30M)
> >>
> >>I thought I knew what to do with this, but my past failures in
> >>compiling kernels on this box make me wary.
> >>
> >>I also have
> >>
> >>   kernel-image-2.4.27_2.4.27-6.tar.gz (95K)
> >>
> >>but I can't understand what I'm supposed to do with it.
> >>I've unpacked it but it seems to be for those who already
> >>know how it works - there's no readme or help I can see.
> >>
> >>I also have:
> >>
> >>   kernel-build-2.4.27_2.4.27-6_i386.deb (8K)
> >>
> >>but I don't really know what to do with it either.
> >>
> >>I do have kernel-package installed.
> >>
> >>As far as I can tell, the latest testing kernel image for Pentium is:
> >>
> >>   kernel-image-2.4.27-1-586tsc_2.4.27-6_i386.deb (11.5M)
> >>
> >>What commands do I need to issue in order to generate a .deb that is
> >>_identical_ to that?  I assume I have to use make-kpkg, and it probably
> >>depends on the precise version of the compiler.
> >>
> >>   
> >>
> >
> >The Debian way really does work. I suggest that you stick with it.
> > 
> >
> I'd certainly prefer to be able to do it the Debian way.
> 
> >You use make-kpkg as your main tool. Making a kernel package that is
> >_identical_ to the precompiled package that you have already
> >downloaded is unwise. You need, at least, to change the
> >version/rev.number or something so that your computer can distinguish
> >between the two (and so that you can distinguish between the two in
> >order to tell whether or not you have succeeded) 
> >
> Well, I was planning to rename the original, downloaded kernel-image, after
> verifying that it would boot my machine.  It should.  I'm currently running
> on the  -2 suffixed kernel, so the -6 should work too, I hope.
> 
> >The instructions for
> >setting up this change are in man page (I think). Choose an ID string
> >that includes something personal, such as you initials. 
> > 
> >
> I think I see how to do this, now that I've been directed to:
> 
> http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/reference/ch-kernel.en.html
> 
> >Then copy the config file of the prepackaged kernel from /boot into
> >the source tree under /usr, and follow the steps in the man page.
> > 
> >
> Makes sense.
> 
> >Making a near identical copy of a Debian kernel package is a good
> >training exercise, and good first step. If it fails, you know that
> >your new kernel is not failing because of a poor choise of kernel
> >config options, you are using the ones that you know work for your
> >hardware. After you have succeeded at this exercise, you can start
> >tweeking the config parms and recompiling.
> >
> >HTH
> > 
> >
> The point of making one that is byte-for-byte identical to the downloaded
> kernel-image is to check for subtle errors.  If I get a kernel-image that is
> similar but not identical, it would be difficult to rule out user error if
> the thing doesn't in fact boot.  If I can create one that is identical, 
> then
> customising it should be a snap.

The kernel image (i.e. the actual file that is used to load the kernel
into RAM) contains its own name, as internal data. You will have a
muddle if you try to have two kernel images on your harddisk that have
the same name. If you have a

Re: How can I make a kernel package that is _identical_ to those available for download?

[R G Cottrell]

Paul E Condon wrote:
On Thu, Dec 30, 2004 at 01:22:01PM +1000, R G Cottrell wrote:
 

cancer wrote:
   

as far as i know xconfig should read the .config file of the running
kernel if there is no other. i have poor experience with that, but it
worked for me for a couple of times.
 

In my experience, make xconfig and make menuconfig both read the .config
file in the source directory, which is present when you install the sources.
I've tried copying the appropriate config file from the /boot directory and
loading that, but without success. :-(
   

I think all that is needed is to copy the appropriate config file from
/boot and give it the name .config, and put it where xconfig and
menuconfig expect to find it. You can know where that is by running
menuconfig and seeing where it puts its version of config. i.e. first
run menuconfig, but pay no attention to getting the config correct,
just find where it is. Then overwrite it with a copy of config from
/boot. Either wrong name or wrong place will cause failure.
 

Sounds workable.  Thanks again, Paul.
I don't think I should try this stuff out right now - I've been up for 
about 22 hours.
As tempting as it would be to let the thing compile while I sleep, I 
think I'll come
back to it after some shut-eye when I'm less likely to make silly mistakes.

Regards, Rossc.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]