On 05/11/2007 03:15 PM, Jarod Wilson wrote:
Josh Boyer wrote:
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 13:01 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
Readable diff attached. And the answer (at least from me) is no -- I'm
not happy about applying it with all the ifdefs. We can apply the clean
bits though -- obviously it won't actually build, but then we can set
about actually _fixing_ exec-shield, etc.
+1 for not happy about all the ifdef alpha's
For me it was the fastest and easiest method to actually *build* a newer
kernel from this spec. I would be very happy if we can fix it - sure!
+%ifarch alpha alphaev5 alphaev56 alphaev6 alphaev67
instead of listing all the alpha arches everywhere, you should define a
macro like %{all_alpha}
+1
Sure. Yes. Not much work.
# To temporarily exclude an architecture from being built, add it to
# %nobuildarches. Do _NOT_ use the ExclusiveArch: line, because if we
# don't build kernel-headers then the new build system will no
longer let
@@ -290,13 +307,13 @@
Group: System Environment/Kernel
License: GPLv2
Version: %{rpmversion}
-Release: %{release}
+Release: %{release}axp
Shouldn't need to muck with Release
Indeed. There's a %buildid define further up in the spec if you really
want to alter the release tag for your own build, but we're certainly
not going to merge this part of the patch. :)
Yes guys, I know. Sorry, shouldn't have added this hunk. :-)
%if 0%{?olpc}
ExclusiveArch: i386 i586
%else
# DO NOT CHANGE THIS LINE TO TEMPORARILY EXCLUDE AN ARCHITECTURE BUILD.
# SET %nobuildarches (ABOVE) INSTEAD
-ExclusiveArch: noarch %{all_x86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ia64 sparc sparc64
s390 s390x
+ExclusiveArch: noarch %{all_x86} x86_64 ppc ppc64 ia64 sparc sparc64
s390 s390x alpha alphaev6 alphaev67
%endif
ExclusiveOS: Linux
Provides: kernel-drm = 4.3.0
@@ -363,6 +380,9 @@
#Source67: kernel-%{kversion}-sparc64.config
#Source68: kernel-%{kversion}-sparc64-smp.config
+Source50: kernel-%{kversion}-alpha.config
+Source50: kernel-%{kversion}-alpha-smp.config
Do you need an alpha-smp.config since you turned smp builds off?
Not to mention that they should have different SourceX numbers if you do
intend to include both.
That's true. Typo :-)
-of
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
