On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 11:57 PM Thomas Weißschuh <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2024-07-21 22:42:12+0000, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 9:11 PM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > Hi Masahiro, > > > > > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 03:58:49PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2024 at 12:32 PM Nathan Chancellor <nathan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Sat, Jul 20, 2024 at 11:18:12AM +0200, Thomas Weißschuh wrote: > > > > > > pacman is the package manager used by Arch Linux and its derivates. > > > > > > Creating native packages from the kernel tree has multiple advantages: > > > > > > > > > > > > * The package triggers the correct hooks for initramfs generation and > > > > > > bootloader configuration > > > > > > * Uninstallation is complete and also invokes the relevant hooks > > > > > > * New UAPI headers can be installed without any manual bookkeeping > > > > > > > > > > > > The PKGBUILD file is a modified version of the one used for the > > > > > > downstream Arch Linux "linux" package. > > > > > > Extra steps that should not be necessary for a development kernel have > > > > > > been removed and an UAPI header package has been added. > > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > --- > > > > > > > > > > I think this looks really solid now, thanks again for the PACMAN_PKGBASE > > > > > addition. > > > > > > > > > > I tested building Arch Linux's configuration for x86_64 and booting it > > > > > in a VM. I built Fedora's configuration for aarch64 just to test the > > > > > cross building aspect and making sure the result of various bits that we > > > > > added that would not affect x86 (such as the dtb installation) looked > > > > > reasonable. > > > > > > > > > > Reviewed-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > Tested-by: Nathan Chancellor <nathan@xxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > I believe this is a separate issue, but > > > > Debian/Ubuntu provides a 'makepkg' package, which fails > > > > with 'User defined signal 1' error. > > > > > > > > After 'sudo apt install makepkg', > > > > > > > > masahiro@zoe:~/ref/linux-next((HEAD detached from origin/master))$ cat > > > > /etc/os-release > > > > PRETTY_NAME="Ubuntu 24.04 LTS" > > > > NAME="Ubuntu" > > > > VERSION_ID="24.04" > > > > VERSION="24.04 LTS (Noble Numbat)" > > > > VERSION_CODENAME=noble > > > > ID=ubuntu > > > > ID_LIKE=debian > > > > HOME_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/"; > > > > SUPPORT_URL="https://help.ubuntu.com/"; > > > > BUG_REPORT_URL="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/"; > > > > PRIVACY_POLICY_URL="https://www.ubuntu.com/legal/terms-and-policies/privacy-policy"; > > > > UBUNTU_CODENAME=noble > > > > LOGO=ubuntu-logo > > > > masahiro@zoe:~/ref/linux-next((HEAD detached from origin/master))$ > > > > makepkg --version > > > > makepkg (pacman) 6.0.2 > > > > Copyright (c) 2006-2021 Pacman Development Team <pacman-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>. > > > > Copyright (C) 2002-2006 Judd Vinet <jvinet@xxxxxxxxxxxx>. > > > > > > > > This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. > > > > There is NO WARRANTY, to the extent permitted by law. > > > > masahiro@zoe:~/ref/linux-next((HEAD detached from origin/master))$ git > > > > log --oneline -2 > > > > 5dcaebb67ad9 (HEAD) kbuild: add script and target to generate pacman package > > > > 41c196e567fb (tag: next-20240719, origin/master, origin/HEAD) Add > > > > linux-next specific files for 20240719 > > > > masahiro@zoe:~/ref/linux-next((HEAD detached from origin/master))$ > > > > make defconfig pacman-pkg > > > > *** Default configuration is based on 'x86_64_defconfig' > > > > # > > > > # No change to .config > > > > # > > > > objtree="/home/masahiro/ref/linux-next" \ > > > > BUILDDIR="" \ > > > > > > It is not related to this issue but I don't think this should be empty. > > > 'realpath pacman' does not appear to work here, I was able to fix this > > > with the following diff: > > > > > > diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.package b/scripts/Makefile.package > > > index 94357f47d2fa..b0fd44a40075 100644 > > > --- a/scripts/Makefile.package > > > +++ b/scripts/Makefile.package > > > @@ -148,7 +148,7 @@ PHONY += pacman-pkg > > > pacman-pkg: > > > @ln -srf $(srctree)/scripts/package/PKGBUILD $(objtree)/PKGBUILD > > > +objtree="$(realpath $(objtree))" \ > > > - BUILDDIR="$(realpath pacman)" \ > > > + BUILDDIR="$(realpath $(objtree))/pacman" \ > > > > > > Right. > > > > $(realpath pacman) expands to empty > > if 'pacman' does not exist yet. > > Your fix is correct. > > I'm wondering how it worked for me, as I specifically tested this case. > But I'm fine with the proposal. > > Shouldn't it be "$(realpath ./pacman)" though? > > > > > > CARCH="$(UTS_MACHINE)" \ > > > KBUILD_MAKEFLAGS="$(MAKEFLAGS)" \ > > > KBUILD_REVISION="$(shell $(srctree)/scripts/build-version)" \ > > > > > > > > > > CARCH="x86_64" \ > > > > KBUILD_MAKEFLAGS="rR --no-print-directory" \ > > > > KBUILD_REVISION="4" \ > > > > makepkg > > > > > > > > ==> ERROR: An unknown error has occurred. Exiting... > > > > User defined signal 1 > > > > make[3]: *** [scripts/Makefile.package:150: pacman-pkg] Error 138 > > > > make[2]: *** [Makefile:1538: pacman-pkg] Error 2 > > > > make[1]: *** [/home/masahiro/ref/linux-next/Makefile:347: > > > > __build_one_by_one] Error 2 > > > > make: *** [Makefile:224: __sub-make] Error 2 > > > > > > > > Do you know anything? > > > > > > Adding '-x' to the interpreter line in /usr/bin/makepkg shows that > > > pacman is implicitly required for makepkg to function, so you'll need to > > > install pacman-package-manager as well. However, even with it installed, > > > the build will fail because you will be unable to perform the dependency > > > checking (since pacman won't be managing the packages). > > It seems very weird that there is no dependency, not even a soft one, > from makepkg to pacman. > > > > I think the traditional solution for this situation (building a > > > distribution's package on a distribution other than the one the package > > > is being built for) is using an OPTS variable to allow the user to pass > > > in the dependency checking skip flag (that's what I do for RPM builds on > > > Arch Linux), so perhaps MAKEPKGOPTS so that you can use MAKEPKGOPTS=-d? > > > With this diff and that variable value, the build starts within makepkg > > > for me. > > > > > > diff --git a/scripts/Makefile.package b/scripts/Makefile.package > > > index b0fd44a40075..4a80584ec771 100644 > > > --- a/scripts/Makefile.package > > > +++ b/scripts/Makefile.package > > > @@ -152,7 +152,7 @@ pacman-pkg: > > > CARCH="$(UTS_MACHINE)" \ > > > KBUILD_MAKEFLAGS="$(MAKEFLAGS)" \ > > > KBUILD_REVISION="$(shell $(srctree)/scripts/build-version)" \ > > > - makepkg > > > + makepkg $(MAKEPKGOPTS) > > > > > > Thank you for delving into this! > > Thanks to both of you! > > > With -d option, I was able to compile it. > > > > I previously compile-tested it in an Arch Linux Docker container, > > but this is more convenient. > > > > > > Thomas, will you send v8 with Nathan's suggestion? > > > > Or, I can offer to fold the diff if Thomas agrees. > > If you are fine with folding the diff, please do! > Applied with Nathan's diff. Thanks! -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada
