On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 08:34:46AM +0100, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 06:31:10PM -0400, Paul Wouters wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Richard W.M. Jones wrote: > > > > >>Le jeudi 08 août 2013 à 22:35 +0100, Richard W.M. Jones a écrit : > > >>>I wonder (idly) if anyone has every tried to package UML for Fedora, > > >>>and if there is anything in the packaging guidelines that would stop > > >>>UML being packaged as a regular package? > > >> > > >>By regular package, you mean using a separate spec/srpm from the kernel > > >>spec ? > > > > > >I'm only idly speculating, but yes, probably. > > > > I maintain uml_utilities for fedora. It needs a tunctl conflict > > resolved, but otherwise should work? > > That's just utilities, not the actual binary. Yep, since UML is basically just another special kernel build, I always had the impression that you'd have to convince the kenrel RPM maintainers to add another sub-RPM containing the UML build for it to get into Fedora. Does UML kernel even build on Fedora these days ? I tried to build it a year or so back and found that it had ben broken by GCC/LD update and no one upstream showed any interest in fixing it. So I rather considered UML to be dead after that experiance. Daniel -- |: http://berrange.com -o- http://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange/ :| |: http://libvirt.org -o- http://virt-manager.org :| |: http://autobuild.org -o- http://search.cpan.org/~danberr/ :| |: http://entangle-photo.org -o- http://live.gnome.org/gtk-vnc :| -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
