On 06/13/2016 11:41 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 2:32 PM, Prarit Bhargava <prarit@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 06/10/2016 03:42 PM, Miguel Flores Silverio wrote:
Signed-off-by: Miguel Flores Silverio <floresmigu3l@xxxxxxxxx>
---
scripts/fast-build.sh | 13 +++++++++++++
1 file changed, 13 insertions(+)
create mode 100755 scripts/fast-build.sh
diff --git a/scripts/fast-build.sh b/scripts/fast-build.sh
new file mode 100755
index 0000000..19eaa4d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/scripts/fast-build.sh
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
+#! /bin/sh
+# Description:
+# rpmbuild combo to build the given architecture with
+# no debugging information, perf and tools.
+#
+# Sample usage:
+# ./fast-build.sh x86_64 kernel-4.7.0-0.rc1.git1.2.fc25.src.rpm
+
+if [ -z "$1" ] || [ -z "$2" ]; then
+ echo "usage: $0 [ arch ] [ kernel-x.x.x.fcxx.src.rpm ] "
+fi
+
+rpmbuild --target $1 --without debuginfo --without perf --without tools --rebuild $2
--
Is the --target really necessary? Why not just do $(arch)?
Not following that question.
I think the question is do we ever want to build for an arch that doesn't
match the current system. As long as we have 32-bit available the target
is useful so I think it should stay.
FWIW jboyer ... I'm leaning towards Jarod's comment on whether or not this is
necessary. Why not put in a comment in the spec on this?
Because the spec is a nightmare of text and confusion for anyone that
hasn't spent a week staring at it. If we want to get really picky,
it's one of the worst spec files in Fedora aside from gcc. There are
many reasons why it is so, but new users don't know those reasons and
frankly don't care. If someone wants to tackle that beast, I'm all
for massive improvements that leave all the pieces functional.
Yes. Having a quick build shortcut reduces the burden on users building
their own kernel.
Thanks,
Laura
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list
kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
