From: Keir F. <Kei...@cl...> - 2004-10-23 18:07:20
|
We distribute sparse source trees because they are convenenient to develop with (the BK repositories are primarily geared for development). Probably also distributing script(s) to cook the directories into sane diffs or whatever would be useful. It sounds to me like, now you have your scripts written, that the hassle is over --- just start your script and make a cup of coffee? :-) If not, where does the ongoing trouble arise from? -- Keir > To be completely honest, I dislike the curent sparse patchfile setup > with a passion. 8-P It's a RPITA to work with when packaging xen for > Debian (or other distros that uses src tree patches for their main > kernels) and for creating multiple kernels using different unified diff > patch files for each kernel. I have to copy the linux source tree 4 > times to get a clean patch of xen+distro patches as a unified diff since > debian distributes kernel-source-* with their patches already in it (I'm > certain other distros have their own patches as well) to keep from a: > blowing up the debian source tree (this is partly debian's fault, sinc e > it distributs a patched kernel source instead of pristine that's then > patched to get debian's kernels). > > I understand why it's a sparse patch file, reduces bulk by quite a bit. > But It's darn unfriendly when you want to compile both 2.4 and 2.6 > kernels along with your distros patches. 8-P Not to to mention the fact > that it walks ALL over any distro kernel src tree that's been patched > since it replaces a few of the standard distro files outright. 8-P |