On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 7:54 AM, Al Dunsmuir <al.dunsmuir@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wednesday, March 19, 2014, 2:09:15 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> Josh Boyer (jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said: >>>> > 2) A per-arch filter list, because the existing one that works on >>>> > x86_64 leaves modules in kernel-core on ARM that lack their >>>> > dependencies. Bad. >>>> >>>> OK, I sorted this out this week. I believe the only arch left to do is >>>> s390x and that's only because I forgot about it. Oops. >>> >>> Is this even needed on s390 for reasons other than consistency? Similarly >>> with power, is the idea to have a core kernel for running on an LPAR and >>> then -drivers for the rest of it? > >> Needed? Probably not. At the moment it's not possible to build a >> normal kernel on one arch and the split on another. If we're going to >> go off and make changes to anaconda and yum and dnf to cope with this, >> consistency on what is shipped is probably a good thing. > >> That being said, it is flexible in terms of the content of those >> packages. So ppc64 could do what you suggest. s390x would arguably >> just shove almost everything in -drivers. In reality, I expect most >> arches to just install both packages anyway. > > If you update the ppc64 kernel package, please also do the same for > the ppc 32-bit kernel. I did. I have to adapt for all architectures we build for, and ppc is one of those. You can find it in the scratch build I pointed to earlier in the thread. josh _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
