Re: Re: question about the kernel
dekkz...@gmail.com wrote: > On 08/10, deloptes wrote: >>songbird wrote: >> >>> the debian processes are done via the kernel >>> team and so you can also follow that mailing list >>> (i read via gmane and usenet). >> >>And you can always do "make deb-pkg" on the source and produce a ready for >>use debian package >> >>regards > > How would i go about modifying the .config to enable n3fold in the kernel > using make deb-pkg? > Best way is make menuconfig will open the .config (ncurses) and you can find your way to the driver. You can also look at the documentation for more options What is n3fold BTW? regards
Re: Re: question about the kernel
On 08/10, deloptes wrote: songbird wrote: the debian processes are done via the kernel team and so you can also follow that mailing list (i read via gmane and usenet). And you can always do "make deb-pkg" on the source and produce a ready for use debian package regards How would i go about modifying the .config to enable n3fold in the kernel using make deb-pkg? -- regards. Dekks Herton Thinkpad T61 2.0Ghz 2GB WSXGA+ Jabber IM: dekkz...@jabber.hot-chilli.net signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: question about the kernel
https://www.mycause.com.au/page/183259/a-smile-will-change-a-day-love-that-changed-my-world From: mick crane Sent: Thursday, 9 August 2018 5:15 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: question about the kernel Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed between all the kernel developers at any particular date and that Linux distributions can take bits out from that for their release but shouldn't add bespoke stuff that isn't agreed by everybody else ? just wondering how that works. mick -- Key ID4BFEBB31
Re: question about the kernel
songbird wrote: > the debian processes are done via the kernel > team and so you can also follow that mailing list > (i read via gmane and usenet). And you can always do "make deb-pkg" on the source and produce a ready for use debian package regards
Re: question about the kernel
mick crane wrote: > Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed > between all the kernel developers at any particular date and that Linux > distributions can take bits out from that for their release but > shouldn't add bespoke stuff that isn't agreed by everybody else ? > > just wondering how that works. reading the main mailing list for a while will give you an idea, but these are the main starting points for the kernel in general: https://www.kernel.org/ https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/ the debian processes are done via the kernel team and so you can also follow that mailing list (i read via gmane and usenet). songbird
Re: question about the kernel
Hi. On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 12:45:39PM +, davidson wrote: > On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Reco wrote: > > > Hi. > > > > On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 08:15:42AM +0100, mick crane wrote: > > > Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed between > > > all the kernel developers at any particular date > > > > No. As [1] shows us, there's a mainline branch (aka to-be-released > > kernel), stable branch (aka released kernel) and longterm support > > branches. > > For the record, I looked for the referent of "[1]", but couldn't find > any pointer in Reco's message or OP's. > > So I made a wild guess and went to > > https://www.kernel.org/ I missed that link indeed. Thank you. > There I saw the list of downloads on the front page: > > | mainline: 4.18-rc8 | stable: 4.17.14 | longterm: 4.14.62 | > longterm: 4.9.119 | longterm: 4.4.147 | longterm: 3.18.118 [EOL] | > longterm: 3.16.57 | linux-next: next-20180809 > > I'm going update my CV now: "Accomplished mind reader" :) Reco
Re: question about the kernel
On Thu, 9 Aug 2018, Reco wrote: Hi. On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 08:15:42AM +0100, mick crane wrote: Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed between all the kernel developers at any particular date No. As [1] shows us, there's a mainline branch (aka to-be-released kernel), stable branch (aka released kernel) and longterm support branches. For the record, I looked for the referent of "[1]", but couldn't find any pointer in Reco's message or OP's. So I made a wild guess and went to https://www.kernel.org/ There I saw the list of downloads on the front page: | mainline: 4.18-rc8 | stable: 4.17.14 | longterm: 4.14.62 | longterm: 4.9.119 | longterm: 4.4.147 | longterm: 3.18.118 [EOL] | longterm: 3.16.57 | linux-next: next-20180809 I'm going update my CV now: "Accomplished mind reader" -- Editor’s note: An earlier version of this article incorrectly included a tweet by the International Organization for Standardization, which shares an acronym with the International Socialist Organization. We regret the error. conservativereview.com/news/chicago-international-socialist-organization-socialism-is-about-self-government/
Re: question about the kernel
On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 08:15:42AM +0100, mick crane wrote: Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed between all the kernel developers at any particular date and that Linux distributions can take bits out from that for their release but shouldn't add bespoke stuff that isn't agreed by everybody else ? just wondering how that works. mick The kernel IS a single codebase. The definitive source for it is kernel.org and Linus et al combine the contributions from many sources into the code there. In terms of modifying the code, the kernel is licensed under the GPL which, broadly speaking states "You may copy, distribute and modify the software as long as you track changes/dates in source files. Any modifications to or software including (via compiler) GPL-licensed code must also be made available under the GPL along with build & install instructions." (Courtesy of https://tldrlegal.com/license/gnu-general-public-license-v2). In practice, though, the kernel is very configurable and most distributions merely include or remove parts of the code by changing the configuration before compilation. As for adding new code, there are two hurdles to getting that into the mainline kernel: it must be legally allowable as part of the kernel (e.g. Licensed under the GPL) and it must pass review (by the kernel maintainers). If you can't pass these hurdles, you can provide an out-of-kernel module (this is how things like Virtualbox, Wireguard and NVIDIA work). Your code is distributed separately, but includes the kernel headers and produces a kernel module which can be loaded. Doing this will TAINT the kernel, though (not necessarily a bad thing, but will alert developers to the fact that there may be issues). -- For more information, please reread. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: question about the kernel
Hi. On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 08:15:42AM +0100, mick crane wrote: > Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed between > all the kernel developers at any particular date No. As [1] shows us, there's a mainline branch (aka to-be-released kernel), stable branch (aka released kernel) and longterm support branches. Also, anyone can make their own fork of the kernel. To name the most used ones there are RedHat's fork and OpenWRT's fork. > and that Linux > distributions can take bits out from that for their release Every Linux distribution effectively maintains their own branch of kernel, Debian included. AFAIK Slackware is one of distributions that tries to to maintain the least deviation from the upstream possible. > but shouldn't > add bespoke stuff that isn't agreed by everybody else ? Tell that to RedHat, which single-handedly implemented their own special way of signing the kernel and its modules (and which was not accepted by upstream). Or Novell with their kgraft. Or Oracle with ksplice and dtrace. Reco
question about the kernel
Am I right in thinking that the kernel is a single codebase agreed between all the kernel developers at any particular date and that Linux distributions can take bits out from that for their release but shouldn't add bespoke stuff that isn't agreed by everybody else ? just wondering how that works. mick -- Key ID4BFEBB31
