Am 04.04.2013 15:12, schrieb Josh Boyer: > On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 07:48:14AM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote: >> Hi Josh, >> >> as mentioned on IRC, here is the patch for the rawhide kernel.spec. > > I'm on PTO the rest of the week, but I wanted to ask a few quick > questions. > >> This patch is part of an upstream coordination, intended to unify the various >> ways distributions handle: > > Has the change to the kernel makefiles to use this been sent upstream > yet? I've been keeping an eye out for it and haven't seen it. > >> - installation of kernels in the system >> - create the matching initrds; hooking up the various implementations of >> initramfs generators into the kernel package installation process >> - optionally/automatically create bootable rescue images to be able to recover >> from failures: >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DracutHostOnly > > DracutHostOnly is targeted at F19, but the switch to kernel-install is > something we're discussing for F20, correct? Yes, but the current (F19) infrastructure does not support plugging in well, so the new one will be an improvement here. > >> All the above functionality is provided by the “kernel-install” tool: >> http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/kernel-install.html >> >> It features: >> - flexible hookup/plugin directories to manage kernel installation and >> uninstallation. initrd, bootloader, rescue image management, all plug into >> that facility. >> >> - strict separation of distribution-supplied logic and local customization >> logic; system administrators are able to overwrite and replace/extend any part >> of the default logic if needed >> >> - hide distribution-specific logic behind a standardized command line interface >> >> - unify the custom kernel installation from the source tree with the usual >> kernel package installation; like the current /sbin/installkernel > > We had briefly discussed systemd providing /sbin/installkernel to > facilitate the transition from grubby to kernel-install. Is that > something that's being done for now? We want to eat our dogfood first before providing a patch to the kernel-ML, so they can't say: "Hey, your own kernel.spec does not use this, so why should we?" > >> diff --git a/kernel.spec b/kernel.spec >> index a2f1f25..09aef02 100644 >> --- a/kernel.spec >> +++ b/kernel.spec >> @@ -456,7 +456,7 @@ Summary: The Linux kernel >> # Packages that need to be installed before the kernel is, because the %%post >> # scripts use them. >> # >> -%define kernel_prereq fileutils, module-init-tools >= 3.16-4, initscripts >= 8.11.1-1, grubby >= 8.3-1 >> +%define kernel_prereq fileutils, module-init-tools >= 3.16-4, initscripts >= 8.11.1-1, systemd >= 200 >> %define initrd_prereq dracut >= 001-7 > > I'm curious if kernel-install depends on anything in dracut in a version > newer than 001-7. That's pretty old at this point. Well, yes... good point. %define initrd_prereq dracut >= 027 > >> # >> @@ -479,8 +479,7 @@ Provides: kernel-omap-uname-r = %{KVERREL}%{?1:.%{1}}\ >> Requires(pre): %{kernel_prereq}\ >> Requires(pre): %{initrd_prereq}\ >> Requires(pre): linux-firmware >= 20120206-0.1.git06c8f81\ >> -Requires(post): /sbin/new-kernel-pkg\ >> -Requires(preun): /sbin/new-kernel-pkg\ >> +Requires(preun): systemd >= 200\ > > We still need the Requires(post) here, don't we? We're using > kernel-install in posttrans. No.. 1. posttrans is after the rpm transaction, so (pre) is not needed 2. and we also already have Requires(pre): %{kernel_prereq} which includes systemd >= 200 > >> Conflicts: %{kernel_dot_org_conflicts}\ >> Conflicts: %{package_conflicts}\ >> %{expand:%%{?kernel%{?1:_%{1}}_conflicts:Conflicts: %%{kernel%{?1:_%{1}}_conflicts}}}\ >> @@ -2064,8 +2063,8 @@ fi\ >> # >> %define kernel_variant_posttrans() \ >> %{expand:%%posttrans %{?1}}\ >> -/sbin/new-kernel-pkg --package kernel%{?-v:-%{-v*}} --mkinitrd --dracut --depmod --update %{KVERREL}%{?-v:.%{-v*}} || exit $?\ >> -/sbin/new-kernel-pkg --package kernel%{?1:-%{1}} --rpmposttrans %{KVERREL}%{?1:.%{1}} || exit $?\ >> +/sbin/depmod -a %{KVERREL}%{?1:.%{1}} || exit $?;\ >> +/bin/kernel-install add %{KVERREL}%{?1:.%{1}} /%{image_install_path}/vmlinuz-%{KVERREL}%{?1:.%{1}} || exit $?\ >> %{nil} > > Is there a reason kernel-install doesn't run depmod itself? We can do that, too .. true. And even plug that in the callout structure. /usr/lib/kernel/install.d/49-depmod.install /usr/lib/kernel/install.d/50-dracut.install /usr/lib/kernel/install.d/51-dracut-rescue.install Thanks for the comments! _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
