Le 30/05/2019 à 21:33, Michael Jeanson a écrit :
> If you can detect ACPI enabled kernels with a kernel config option, you
> can have DKMS only build the modules when it's enabled. This way you
> don't have to handle manual arch lists in DKMS or in the package. The
> install on non-acpi will be
On 2019-05-29 7:39 p.m., Raphaël Halimi wrote:
> Le 29/05/2019 à 15:41, Ondřej Surý a écrit :
>> can’t you just “skip” building the module in DKMS when on unsupported
>> architecture?
>>
>> Install the package on that system would be noop then.
>
> Well, I was so focused on trying to make the
Le 30/05/2019 à 19:28, Adrian Bunk a écrit :
>> Well, that's what I thought to do at the beginning, but the docs say
>> that binary package duplication is a bad thing, and I didn't know if
>> four copies of a 13 KB package (so a waste of 49 KB per mirror, which
>> would seem negligible unless
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 01:14:10PM +0200, Raphaël Halimi wrote:
>...
> Well, that's what I thought to do at the beginning, but the docs say
> that binary package duplication is a bad thing, and I didn't know if
> four copies of a 13 KB package (so a waste of 49 KB per mirror, which
> would seem
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 01:14:10PM +0200, Raphaël Halimi wrote:
> Well, that's what I thought to do at the beginning, but the docs say
> that binary package duplication is a bad thing, and I didn't know if
> four copies of a 13 KB package (so a waste of 49 KB per mirror, which
> would seem
Le 30/05/2019 à 04:14, Paul Wise a écrit :
> dak needs a way to restrict the availability of arch:all packages to
> certain architecture's Packages files. This would also be useful for
> interpreted code that only has support for certain kernel interfaces
> that aren't available on non-Linux
On Wed, May 29, 2019 at 8:46 PM Raphaël Halimi wrote:
> What would be the "cleanest" solution according to you ?
The cleanest solution would be to get this code into Linux mainline.
Some discussion of workarounds:
dak needs a way to restrict the availability of arch:all packages to
certain
Le 29/05/2019 à 15:41, Ondřej Surý a écrit :
> can’t you just “skip” building the module in DKMS when on unsupported
> architecture?
>
> Install the package on that system would be noop then.
Well, I was so focused on trying to make the package unavailable on
non-ACPI architectures that I
> On 29 May 2019, at 14:45, Raphaël Halimi wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I'm the maintainer of package acpi-call, which is a kernel module
> allowing a user to call ACPI methods. Its build is handled by DKMS.
>
> The module used to build on all architectures, even if it was obviously
> useless on those
Hi,
I'm the maintainer of package acpi-call, which is a kernel module
allowing a user to call ACPI methods. Its build is handled by DKMS.
The module used to build on all architectures, even if it was obviously
useless on those which don't support ACPI.
Starting with Linux 5.2, what used to be a
10 matches
Mail list logo
