Re: [PATCH] build a 'full' package on i686

2009-07-22 Thread Quentin Armitage
On Mon, 2009-07-20 at 18:48 -0400, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:27:40PM +0100, Quentin Armitage wrote:
>  > Bill Nottingham  wrote:
>  > > The proposal to have the baseline be i686 + SSE2 was shot down; bare
>  > > i686 was approved.
>  > 
>  > Does this mean that an i686 kernel without PAE will still be built (my
>  > laptop processor does not have PAE so I am rather interested)? 
> 
> yes
> 
>  > I note
>  > that the latest build on Koji has not built an i686 without PAE version,
>  > and the comments against kernel.spec revision 1.1639 suggests there
>  > won't be a non-PAE kernel. On the other hand, revision 1.1640 references
>  > Source31: config-i686, although I don't see that file in  CVS.
> 
> screwup on my part. it's unnecessary. the non-PAE build is basically
> just config-x86-generic.
> 
>   Dave
Now there is an i686 kernel available in Rawhide, should doing a yum
update update my i586 kernel to the latest i686 version? yum update
shows that it will update kernel-firmware.noarch to
2.6.31-0.81.rc3.git4.fc12 and kernel-headers.i686 to
0:2.6.31-0.81.rc3.git4.fc12, but it does not update the kernel package.
Indeed, if I try yum install kernel-2.6.31-0.81.rc3.git4.fc12.i686.rpm,
yum reports: kernel-2.6.31-0.81.rc3.git4.fc12.i686.rpm: does not update
installed package.

Quentin

___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list


Re: [PATCH] build a 'full' package on i686

2009-07-20 Thread Dave Jones
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:27:40PM +0100, Quentin Armitage wrote:
 > Bill Nottingham  wrote:
 > > The proposal to have the baseline be i686 + SSE2 was shot down; bare
 > > i686 was approved.
 > 
 > Does this mean that an i686 kernel without PAE will still be built (my
 > laptop processor does not have PAE so I am rather interested)? 

yes

 > I note
 > that the latest build on Koji has not built an i686 without PAE version,
 > and the comments against kernel.spec revision 1.1639 suggests there
 > won't be a non-PAE kernel. On the other hand, revision 1.1640 references
 > Source31: config-i686, although I don't see that file in  CVS.

screwup on my part. it's unnecessary. the non-PAE build is basically
just config-x86-generic.

Dave

___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list


Re: [PATCH] build a 'full' package on i686

2009-07-20 Thread Quentin Armitage
Bill Nottingham  wrote:
> The proposal to have the baseline be i686 + SSE2 was shot down; bare
> i686 was approved.

Does this mean that an i686 kernel without PAE will still be built (my
laptop processor does not have PAE so I am rather interested)? I note
that the latest build on Koji has not built an i686 without PAE version,
and the comments against kernel.spec revision 1.1639 suggests there
won't be a non-PAE kernel. On the other hand, revision 1.1640 references
Source31: config-i686, although I don't see that file in  CVS.

Quentin 

___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list


Re: [PATCH] build a 'full' package on i686

2009-07-20 Thread Bill Nottingham
Dave Jones (da...@redhat.com) said: 
> Oh, I thought that proposal got shot down.

The proposal to have the baseline be i686 + SSE2 was shot down; bare
i686 was approved.

Bill

___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list


Re: [PATCH] build a 'full' package on i686

2009-07-20 Thread Dave Jones
On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 10:12:06AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
 > Dave Jones (da...@redhat.com) said: 
 > >  > +# We only build -PAE on 686.
 > >  >  %ifarch i686
 > >  > -%define with_up 0
 > >  >  %define with_pae 1
 > >  >  %else
 > >  >  %define with_pae 0
 > >  
 > > The naming of 'with_up' is subtle here.  With this change,
 > > we'll try building a '686' kernel as well as a '686-PAE'.
 > 
 > That was the intent, as the i586 package would be going away.

Oh, I thought that proposal got shot down.
We're really dropping support for all those old systems?

I'm ok with it if it's been approved, but want to be sure before
I start gutting the kernel of 586isms.

Dave

___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list


Re: [PATCH] build a 'full' package on i686

2009-07-20 Thread Bill Nottingham
Dave Jones (da...@redhat.com) said: 
>  > +# We only build -PAE on 686.
>  >  %ifarch i686
>  > -%define with_up 0
>  >  %define with_pae 1
>  >  %else
>  >  %define with_pae 0
>  
> The naming of 'with_up' is subtle here.  With this change,
> we'll try building a '686' kernel as well as a '686-PAE'.

That was the intent, as the i586 package would be going away.

Bill

___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list


Re: [PATCH] build a 'full' package on i686

2009-07-19 Thread Dave Jones
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 01:01:54PM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
 > This is needed for the i686-by-default feature.
 > 
 > Bill

 > Index: kernel.spec
 > ===
 > RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/kernel/devel/kernel.spec,v
 > retrieving revision 1.1634
 > diff -u -r1.1634 kernel.spec
 > --- kernel.spec  17 Jul 2009 02:07:24 -  1.1634
 > +++ kernel.spec  17 Jul 2009 17:01:15 -
 > @@ -195,9 +195,8 @@
 >  %endif
 >  %define debuginfodir /usr/lib/debug
 >  
 > -# We only build -PAE for 686 as of Fedora 11.
 > +# We only build -PAE on 686.
 >  %ifarch i686
 > -%define with_up 0
 >  %define with_pae 1
 >  %else
 >  %define with_pae 0
 
The naming of 'with_up' is subtle here.  With this change,
we'll try building a '686' kernel as well as a '686-PAE'.
(which no longer exists, in favour of using the 586 kernel)

Dave

___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list


[PATCH] build a 'full' package on i686

2009-07-17 Thread Bill Nottingham
This is needed for the i686-by-default feature.

Bill
Index: kernel.spec
===
RCS file: /cvs/extras/rpms/kernel/devel/kernel.spec,v
retrieving revision 1.1634
diff -u -r1.1634 kernel.spec
--- kernel.spec 17 Jul 2009 02:07:24 -  1.1634
+++ kernel.spec 17 Jul 2009 17:01:15 -
@@ -195,9 +195,8 @@
 %endif
 %define debuginfodir /usr/lib/debug
 
-# We only build -PAE for 686 as of Fedora 11.
+# We only build -PAE on 686.
 %ifarch i686
-%define with_up 0
 %define with_pae 1
 %else
 %define with_pae 0
@@ -249,9 +248,9 @@
 %define with_perf 0
 %endif
 
-# no need to build headers again for these arches,
-# they can just use i586 and ppc64 headers
-%ifarch i686 ppc64iseries
+# no need to build headers again for this arch,
+# they can just use ppc64 headers
+%ifarch ppc64iseries
 %define with_headers 0
 %endif
 
___
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list