Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware - Ubuntu ; Where could I find it? -- @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY. / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you! /( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04.1) Linux 2.6.27.3 ^ ^ 12:16:01 up 2:11 3 users load ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware

  1. Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware


    Where could I find it?

    --
    @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
    / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
    /( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04.1) Linux 2.6.27.3
    ^ ^ 12:16:01 up 2:11 3 users load average: 1.00 1.03 1.06
    不借貸! 不詐騙! 不援交! 不打交! 不打劫! 不自殺! 請考慮綜援 (CSSA):
    http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa

  2. Re: Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware

    On Sat, 25 Oct 2008 12:17:05 +0800
    "Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" wrote:

    > Where could I find it?


    Funny I should see the dreaded "make-kpkg" in a subject line. I just
    got finished installing 2.6.28 on my system (it has several little
    features and a few big ones that I *really* want). I wanted to do this
    using the package manager, but every single time I found a problem that
    I couldn't work around, or had an installation issue, that was caused
    by make-kpkg itself. I am fairly convinced that unless you're a guru,
    make-kpkg is pretty broken.

    I'd love to be shown that I am wrong, though. It'd be nice if
    packaging a kernel for Ubuntu weren't much harder than building a
    vanilla upstream kernel. At least Intrepid contains and uses DKMS,
    which makes upgrading the kernel a *lot* easier than it used to be.

    --- Mike

    --
    My sigfile ran away and is on hiatus.


  3. Re: Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware

    "Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" wrote:
    >
    > Where could I find it?


    Where can you find what?

    --
    [mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
    [page]:
    Try the download section.

  4. Re: Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware

    CBFalconer wrote:
    > "Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" wrote:
    >> Where could I find it?

    >
    > Where can you find what?
    >


    The new make-kpkg script that provides versioning for /lib/firmware.

    --
    @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
    / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
    /( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04.1) Linux 2.6.26.7
    ^ ^ 13:04:01 up 47 min 4 users load average: 1.27 1.42 1.23
    *ɶU! BF! ! ! T! ۱! ЦҼ{ (CSSA):
    http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa

  5. Re: Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware

    > Funny I should see the dreaded "make-kpkg" in a subject line. I just
    > got finished installing 2.6.28 on my system (it has several little
    > features and a few big ones that I *really* want). I wanted to do this
    > using the package manager, but every single time I found a problem that
    > I couldn't work around, or had an installation issue, that was caused
    > by make-kpkg itself. I am fairly convinced that unless you're a guru,
    > make-kpkg is pretty broken.


    If you don't use make-kpkg, then you won't have install conflict on
    /lib/firmware when you upgrade from 2.6.28 to 2.6.28.1 (or 2.6.27.x to
    2.6.27.x+1)

    --
    @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
    / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
    /( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04.1) Linux 2.6.26.7
    ^ ^ 13:05:01 up 48 min 4 users load average: 1.17 1.36 1.22
    *ɶU! BF! ! ! T! ۱! ЦҼ{ (CSSA):
    http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa

  6. Re: Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware

    On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 13:06:09 +0800
    "Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" wrote:

    > > Funny I should see the dreaded "make-kpkg" in a subject line. I
    > > just got finished installing 2.6.28 on my system (it has several
    > > little features and a few big ones that I *really* want). I wanted
    > > to do this using the package manager, but every single time I found
    > > a problem that I couldn't work around, or had an installation
    > > issue, that was caused by make-kpkg itself. I am fairly convinced
    > > that unless you're a guru, make-kpkg is pretty broken.

    >
    > If you don't use make-kpkg, then you won't have install conflict on
    > /lib/firmware when you upgrade from 2.6.28 to 2.6.28.1 (or 2.6.27.x to
    > 2.6.27.x+1)


    I didn't have any issues with that, though I did have a great deal of
    issues getting the new kernel to properly work. Using make-kpkg and
    then installing the new kernel with dpkg, I found my nvidia things not
    working quite right, and found that I was unable to use DKMS to rebuild
    it. Part of that was due to a change in the kernel, I have since
    learned, but it seems that the other part of it is or might be due to
    some special handling of the include files that isn't done by
    make-kpkg.

    In the end, I wound up installing 2.6.28 manually. I am quite happy
    that way, despite it meaning that I am on my own with support from
    upstream.

    --- Mike

    --
    My sigfile ran away and is on hiatus.
    http://www.trausch.us/


  7. Re: Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware

    > I didn't have any issues with that, though I did have a great deal of
    > issues getting the new kernel to properly work. Using make-kpkg and
    > then installing the new kernel with dpkg, I found my nvidia things not
    > working quite right, and found that I was unable to use DKMS to rebuild
    > it. Part of that was due to a change in the kernel, I have since
    > learned, but it seems that the other part of it is or might be due to
    > some special handling of the include files that isn't done by
    > make-kpkg.
    >
    > In the end, I wound up installing 2.6.28 manually. I am quite happy
    > that way, despite it meaning that I am on my own with support from
    > upstream.
    >


    When you upgrade to kernel 2.6.28.1, how do you prevent 2.6.28.1's `make
    install` from overwriting the /lib/firmware of 2.6.28? They are using
    the same dir, unlike /lib/modules!!!!

    --
    @~@ Might, Courage, Vision, SINCERITY.
    / v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and Farce be with you!
    /( _ )\ (Xubuntu 8.04.1) Linux 2.6.26.7
    ^ ^ 22:08:01 up 9:51 0 users load average: 1.01 1.03 1.01
    *ɶU! BF! ! ! T! ۱! ЦҼ{ (CSSA):
    http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_...sub_addressesa

  8. Re: Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware

    On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 22:09:23 +0800
    "Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" wrote:

    > When you upgrade to kernel 2.6.28.1, how do you prevent 2.6.28.1's
    > `make install` from overwriting the /lib/firmware of 2.6.28? They are
    > using the same dir, unlike /lib/modules!!!!


    I am not entirely sure why you'd *want* the /lib/firmware directory's
    contents versioned; firmware isn't part of the kernel, and is usually
    supplied by a vendor. The only type of firmware I've ever actually
    used was for wireless chipsets, and the firmware files would have to be
    extracted from the Windows drivers using fwcutter and installed
    in /lib/firmware. A good reason to not have the directory versioned,
    else one would have to copy the firmware to every independent kernel
    directory.

    I guess I don't see why it'd be a problem in the first place.

    --- Mike

    --
    My sigfile ran away and is on hiatus.
    http://www.trausch.us/


  9. Re: Patched make-kpkg for kernel 2.6.27's new /lib/firmware

    On Sun, 26 Oct 2008 22:09:23 +0800
    "Man-wai Chang ToDie (33.6k)" wrote:

    > When you upgrade to kernel 2.6.28.1, how do you prevent 2.6.28.1's
    > `make install` from overwriting the /lib/firmware of 2.6.28? They are
    > using the same dir, unlike /lib/modules!!!!


    I am not entirely sure why you'd *want* the /lib/firmware directory's
    contents versioned; firmware isn't part of the kernel, and is usually
    supplied by a vendor. The only type of firmware I've ever actually
    used was for wireless chipsets, and the firmware files would have to be
    extracted from the Windows drivers using fwcutter and installed
    in /lib/firmware. A good reason to not have the directory versioned,
    else one would have to copy the firmware to every independent kernel
    directory.

    I guess I don't see why it'd be a problem in the first place.

    --- Mike

    --
    My sigfile ran away and is on hiatus.
    http://www.trausch.us/


+ Reply to Thread