On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:37 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:35 PM Jeremy Cline
<jeremy(a)jcline.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2020-04-14 at 21:13 -0400, Paul Moore wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 6:37 PM Jeremy Cline <jeremy(a)jcline.org>
> > wrote:
> > > Okay, this is now done. You may notice a number of stale options
> > > made
> > > their way back into the config files, it's on my to-do list to
> > > clean
> > > this up assuming there aren't any larger fires this week.
> > >
> > > Please send any kernel changes as merge requests to the GitLab
> > > repository or as emails to this list. If you are one of the folks
> > > who
> > > has commit access to the dist-git and adds something there
> > > directly,
> > > I'll pull it into the source tree for you, but I *will* whine at
> > > you
> > > and I'm a world class whiner.
> >
> > My apologies if I missed a discussion on this earlier, but what is
> > the
> > process for building the source tarball for the kernel-headers
> > package? The old process does not seem to apply to the new build
> > process ...
> >
>
> The script did indeed get nuked (although obviously it's in the history
> forever). I haven't made a particular plan for this yet, but the script
> could either move into the kernel-headers package or the source tree.
> I'm inclined to move it into the source tree so the kernel-headers (and
> kernel-tools) packages can be generated from it as well.
>
This would be helpful for me too so that I can build those things from
a custom kernel build easily. The three separate source package thing
isn't very easy to deal with when making custom packages...
It was a bit of a mess, but it was reasonably stable and just a matter
of scripting to automate it. Honestly, I'm not sure I care too much
about the process details, I just want a recipe that I can follow to
generate a patched kernel-headers package.
--
paul moore
www.paul-moore.com