Guido Guenther <agx@debian.org> writes:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2004 at 03:17:30PM +0100, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> > I'm putting together a kernel image package for debian mips and
> > mipsel.
> We already have that (we're at 2.4.22 currently, look for
> kernel-patch-2.4.X-mips). Please don't add new packages, you're welcome
> to take over the current packages however.
> -- Guido
I saw that and am updating it. I was planing of sending you a patch
when its done and working. If you feel your time is running short
(when isn't it) I would rather do a comaintainership then taking it
over completly. Since I'm not a DD yet, still in the NM queue, I would
need a sponsor for the package anyway. Something as important as the
kernel should be cared for my more than one person to minimize
reaction times to security exploits.
While working on the upgrade I came across some questions:
Is the kernel-patch-2.4.22-mips relative to the debian kernel source
or the vanilla source? And is the result (after patching) the mips cvs
or cvs merged with the debian patch? And should that be done that way
again?
I tried a dry run on the debian patch on top of the mips cvs and saw a
few conflicts. Merging the two would be some more work.
Apart from updating the patch (vanila->mips cvs, testing if it gives
any conflicts now) I added my own system XXS1500 board from MyCable to
the configs and added the kernel-image deb and udebs to the control
file. No major changes yet.
Have you thought about dropping the udebs and letting debian-installer
build -di udebs the way it does for several other arches now?
[
1 out of 17 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file arch/mips64/kernel/ioctl32.c.rej
So I guess the source to patch from includes the debian patch. Now I
only need to know what the result should be, i.e. pure cvs or merged?
]
MfG
Goswin
