Re: kernel posttrans and preun hooks for other packages
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 09:49 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> ok, new-kernel-pkg grows a --rpmposttrans mode then to call these
> hooks, and we add a %posttrans to each kernel RPM.
This looks to be working fine, but let me see if I've got this
straight ...
> +%define kernel_variant_posttrans(s:r:v:) \
> +%{expand:%%posttrans %{?-v*}}\
...
> %define kernel_variant_post(s:r:v:) \
> %{expand:%%kernel_devel_post %{?-v*}}\
> +%{expand:%%kernel_variant_posttrans %{?-v*}}\
in this case, %{?-v*} doesn't just expand to the argument to -v, but
also passes the "-v" to %kernel_variant_posttrans ?
i.e. I'd expect it to be something like:
%{expand:%%kernel_variant_posttrans %{?-v:-v %{-v*}}}\
I know spec file syntax is bizarre, but does anyone have a sensible
explanation for this behaviour?
Cheers,
Mark.
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: kernel-xen f9 spec update
On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 09:52 +0200, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 15:19 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote: > > > We recently tweaked the main kernel package's spec file such that we now > > include arch in uname -r output, and have standardized a bunch of path > > names > > to match. Completely forgot about kernel-xen in the process, until > > yesterday, > > when I started porting everything over the the kernel-xen-2.6/devel spec. > > > > The attached spec patch has been build-tested, with some manual inspection > > of > > the resulting packages, but hasn't yet been run-time tested for possible > > issues (none expected, but you never know...). I'll happily help out with > > any > > possible issues if you guys could give this a spin. > > > > Definitely want this in ASAP so the kernel and kernel-xen bits stay mostly > > in > > sync (speaking of which, there's also some rpmposttrans stuff -- dkms > > hooks -- which went into the main kernel spec a bit ago that I don't see in > > the kernel-xen-2.6 spec > > Thanks for the heads-up and the patch. I'm planning on rebasing > kernel-xen-2.6/devel to the latest kernel/devel sometime this week, so > we'll pick up all this stuff. Okay, kernel-xen in rawhide is rebased to 2.6.25-0.182.rc7.git6 if you want to take a look. Thanks, Mark. ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Add SELinux permissive domains to fedora kernels
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 10:50 -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 06:42 +0200, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > > Jeremy Katz wrote: > > > On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 14:07 -0400, Eric Paris wrote: > > >> I know its way late but I'd like to add a new SELinux concept to the F9 > > >> kernels. Its going to be a backport of a couple of my changesets headed > > >> upstream > > > > > > As a cranky release engineering person, no no no no no no > > > > > > We have a feature freeze for a reason, the kernel doesn't get a blank > > > check to get past it. If it was that important, it would have been done > > > in time for the freeze. The next release is in six months, so it's not > > > like it's that long to have to wait > > > > > I can go either way whether this goes in or not. The userspace updates > > are done, The only change would be to modify some tools to quickly build > > a policy module to make a domain permissive. > > > > Permissive domains is a great new feature though: > > Yes, and it'll still be a great new feature for Fedora 10. We have > deadlines. When we don't stick to them, they lead to releases slippage. Well Dan unless you cover his eyes when I do the commit I guess we'll get this when F9 pulls the next kernel from linus :( -Eric ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: Add SELinux permissive domains to fedora kernels
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 06:42 +0200, Daniel J Walsh wrote: > Jeremy Katz wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 14:07 -0400, Eric Paris wrote: > >> I know its way late but I'd like to add a new SELinux concept to the F9 > >> kernels. Its going to be a backport of a couple of my changesets headed > >> upstream > > > > As a cranky release engineering person, no no no no no no > > > > We have a feature freeze for a reason, the kernel doesn't get a blank > > check to get past it. If it was that important, it would have been done > > in time for the freeze. The next release is in six months, so it's not > > like it's that long to have to wait > > > I can go either way whether this goes in or not. The userspace updates > are done, The only change would be to modify some tools to quickly build > a policy module to make a domain permissive. > > Permissive domains is a great new feature though: Yes, and it'll still be a great new feature for Fedora 10. We have deadlines. When we don't stick to them, they lead to releases slippage. Jeremy ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
patch to remove utrace patch for ia64
As discussed in another thread the utrace support for ia64 is not complete upstream yet. The current utrace patch breaks building on ia64. To allow us to continue progress on ia64 can we apply this patch until these issues are resolved? thanks, - Doug *** kernel.spec.bad 2008-04-01 10:37:22.0 -0400 --- kernel.spec 2008-04-01 10:37:40.0 -0400 *** ApplyPatch linux-2.6-compile-fix-gcc-43. *** 987,993 --- 987,995 ApplyPatch linux-2.6-hotfixes.patch # Roland's utrace ptrace replacement. + %ifnarch ia64 ApplyPatch linux-2.6-utrace.patch + %endif # enable sysrq-c on all kernels, not only kexec ApplyPatch linux-2.6-sysrq-c.patch ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: patch to remove utrace patch for ia64
On Tuesday 01 April 2008 10:40:02 am Doug Chapman wrote: > As discussed in another thread the utrace support for ia64 is not > complete upstream yet. The current utrace patch breaks building on > ia64. To allow us to continue progress on ia64 can we apply this patch > until these issues are resolved? Done. -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: kernel-xen f9 spec update
On Tuesday 01 April 2008 10:09:17 am Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-03-31 at 09:52 +0200, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2008-03-29 at 15:19 -0400, Jarod Wilson wrote:
> >
> > > We recently tweaked the main kernel package's spec file such that we now
> > > include arch in uname -r output, and have standardized a bunch of path
> > > names
> > > to match. Completely forgot about kernel-xen in the process, until
> > > yesterday,
> > > when I started porting everything over the the kernel-xen-2.6/devel spec.
> > >
> > > The attached spec patch has been build-tested, with some manual
> > > inspection of
> > > the resulting packages, but hasn't yet been run-time tested for possible
> > > issues (none expected, but you never know...). I'll happily help out with
> > > any
> > > possible issues if you guys could give this a spin.
> > >
> > > Definitely want this in ASAP so the kernel and kernel-xen bits stay
> > > mostly in
> > > sync (speaking of which, there's also some rpmposttrans stuff -- dkms
> > > hooks -- which went into the main kernel spec a bit ago that I don't see
> > > in
> > > the kernel-xen-2.6 spec
> >
> > Thanks for the heads-up and the patch. I'm planning on rebasing
> > kernel-xen-2.6/devel to the latest kernel/devel sometime this week, so
> > we'll pick up all this stuff.
>
> Okay, kernel-xen in rawhide is rebased to 2.6.25-0.182.rc7.git6 if you
> want to take a look.
Apologies if this is a dupe, X is being a tad crashy on me today... Looks much
better, but a few places where %{KVERREL}xen should be changed to
%{KVERREL}.xen to be consistent with the other flavoured kernels.
Index: kernel.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/pkgs/rpms/kernel-xen-2.6/devel/kernel.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.26
diff -u -p -u -p -r1.26 kernel.spec
--- kernel.spec 1 Apr 2008 12:52:48 - 1.26
+++ kernel.spec 1 Apr 2008 14:42:34 -
@@ -1519,8 +1519,8 @@ mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot
cd %{xen_hv_dirname}/xen/
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{image_install_path} $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot
make %{?_smp_mflags} %{xen_flags}
- install -m 644 xen.gz
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{image_install_path}/xen.gz-%{KVERREL}xen
- install -m 755 xen-syms $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/xen-syms-%{KVERREL}xen
+ install -m 644 xen.gz
$RPM_BUILD_ROOT/%{image_install_path}/xen.gz-%{KVERREL}.xen
+ install -m 755 xen-syms $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/boot/xen-syms-%{KVERREL}.xen
cd ../..
%endif
%endif
@@ -1588,8 +1588,8 @@ cd linux-%{kversion}.%{_target_cpu}
%if %{includexen}
%if %{with_xen}
mkdir -p $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/ld.so.conf.d
-rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernelcap-%{KVERREL}xen.conf
-cat > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernelcap-%{KVERREL}xen.conf <<\EOF
+rm -f $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernelcap-%{KVERREL}.xen.conf
+cat > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernelcap-%{KVERREL}.xen.conf <<\EOF
# This directive teaches ldconfig to search in nosegneg subdirectories
# and cache the DSOs there with extra bit 0 set in their hwcap match
# fields. In Xen guest kernels, the vDSO tells the dynamic linker to
@@ -1597,7 +1597,7 @@ cat > $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/ld.so.conf.d/k
# in the ld.so.cache file.
hwcap 0 nosegneg
EOF
-chmod 444 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernelcap-%{KVERREL}xen.conf
+chmod 444 $RPM_BUILD_ROOT/etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernelcap-%{KVERREL}.xen.conf
%endif
%endif
@@ -1744,7 +1744,7 @@ fi}\
%if %{with_xen}
%kernel_variant_preun xen
-%kernel_variant_post -v xen -s kernel-xen[0U] -r kernel-xen -- `[ -d /proc/xen
-a ! -e /proc/xen/xsd_kva ] || echo
--multiboot=/%{image_install_path}/xen.gz-%{KVERREL}xen`
+%kernel_variant_post -v xen -s kernel-xen[0U] -r kernel-xen -- `[ -d /proc/xen
-a ! -e /proc/xen/xsd_kva ] || echo
--multiboot=/%{image_install_path}/xen.gz-%{KVERREL}.xen`
if [ -x /sbin/ldconfig ]
then
/sbin/ldconfig -X || exit $?
@@ -1842,7 +1842,7 @@ fi
%kernel_variant_files %{with_pae} PAE
%kernel_variant_files %{with_pae_debug} PAEdebug
%kernel_variant_files -k vmlinux %{with_kdump} kdump
-%kernel_variant_files -a /%{image_install_path}/xen*-%{KVERREL}xen -e
/etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernelcap-%{KVERREL}xen.conf %{with_xen} xen
+%kernel_variant_files -a /%{image_install_path}/xen*-%{KVERREL}.xen -e
/etc/ld.so.conf.d/kernelcap-%{KVERREL}.xen.conf %{with_xen} xen
%changelog
* Tue Apr 1 2008 Mark McLoughlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--
Jarod Wilson
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
CONFIG_MAC80211_MESH causes kernel build to hang on ia64
This is an odd one which I will continue to try to debug. A recent change added CONFIG_MAC80211_MESH to the fedora kernel. Oddly this causes gcc to hang when building net/mac80211/debugfs_netdev.c. I originally suspected a gcc-4.3 bug but I then reproduced this on RHEL5 with gcc-4.1.2. This code is not yet in Linus's tree. Could someone point me to the git tree where it lives? I am thinking a git-bisect may help me find the specific change that causes this. In the meantime it would be greatly helpful if we could add the following to config-ia64 and config-ia64-generic: # CONFIG_MAC80211_MESH is not set This along with the change to not apply the utrace patch (see my earlier mail) once again allows ia64 to build. thanks, - Doug ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
Re: CONFIG_MAC80211_MESH causes kernel build to hang on ia64
On Tue, 2008-04-01 at 12:19 -0400, Doug Chapman wrote: > This is an odd one which I will continue to try to debug. > > A recent change added CONFIG_MAC80211_MESH to the fedora kernel. Oddly > this causes gcc to hang when building net/mac80211/debugfs_netdev.c. I > originally suspected a gcc-4.3 bug but I then reproduced this on RHEL5 > with gcc-4.1.2. > > This code is not yet in Linus's tree. Could someone point me to the git > tree where it lives? I am thinking a git-bisect may help me find the > specific change that causes this. > > In the meantime it would be greatly helpful if we could add the > following to config-ia64 and config-ia64-generic: > > > # CONFIG_MAC80211_MESH is not set > > This along with the change to not apply the utrace patch (see my earlier > mail) once again allows ia64 to build. > > thanks, > > - Doug > Just spoke with linville on irc. He had another report of this over the weekend and has a fix which he is pushing into Fedora now. Much appreciated John. - Doug ___ Fedora-kernel-list mailing list Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
