Hi Jasmin, On 2018-05-11 15:02, Jasmin J. wrote: > Hello Brad! > >> and which the media_build system does not pick up on for whatever >> reason. > Maybe it would be better to analyse why "make_config_compat.pl" selects > wrongly the compatibility code. I've found several reasons, but the one I seem to encounter often is the symbols are located in files that the config_compat script does not check for. Some symbols have moved between revisions, so a check that works in 4.2 will fail in 3.10 and will also fail in 3.2. I've also seen not-found symbols defined in arch/ code, which makes it a little difficult to add additional paths to the search. There is also the case of a maintainer who puts their backports wherever they felt like and just glued things together in their build. I'm not averse to handling this other ways, but while I was looking at fixing make_config_compat.pl it just seemed that the script would have to be made more complex. The search strategy would have to change to include additional search paths, possibly depending on kernel version as well as support to find symbols in the arch code, while making sure the symbol was found in the correct target arch. I know this is a workaround, but I have to do this 'workaround' in some form for almost every package I maintain. > >> It seems there is quite often at least one backport I must disable, >> and some target kernels require multiple backports disabled. > This sounds strange. media-build should handle those cases correctly > in my opinion and should be fixed. > At least we should check why this happens. > > Patch 7/7 sounds like a workaround for me. > If there is really no other solution, than we need to implement this > possibility for distro maintainers. This is not for distro maintainers. I am the lead engineer at Hauppauge and and a responsibility of mine is the support our hardware on the largest amount of systems and architectures possible. I work with kernels anywhere from 3.2 to 4.15, all provided by either manufacturers or distributions. Some are close to mainline, others not so much. > > On the other hand, why is media-build used by distro maintainers at all? > I thought distro Kernels are built with a full tree and thus doesn't > need media-build. > > BR, > Jasmin I am not a distro maintainer. What I do is maintain and provide out of tree driver packages for a large variety of systems, as well as in tree integrations of the entire media tree for an assortment of Ubuntu kernels. I have no influence over how a maintainer or distro publisher organizes source code. I just take their tree and either compile the media_build system out of tree, or integrate it completely. It is not very often I can get *random_arch* kernel tree from *random_manufacturer* and media_build 'just works'. Like I said in the cover-letter, I'm totally open to better ways of handling this. I am just honestly tired of having to fudge with things before every new build, dirtying up the media_build tree. I like things reproducible and clean and this seems to be the only thing left preventing that. Cheers, Brad
