* [PATCH 1/4] Makefile: rules for printing kernel architecture and localversion @ 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Cc: yamada.masahiro, michal.lkml, info, apw, joe, linux-kbuild, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux trivial rule to print out the kernel arch and localversion, so external tools, like distro packagers, can easily get it. Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> --- Makefile | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 3e4868a..5afc3de 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -1706,6 +1706,12 @@ kernelrelease: kernelversion: @echo $(KERNELVERSION) +kernellocalversion: + @$(CONFIG_SHELL) $(srctree)/scripts/setlocalversion $(srctree) | sed -e 's~^\-~~' + +kernelarch: + @echo $(ARCH) + image_name: @echo $(KBUILD_IMAGE) -- 1.9.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 1/4] Makefile: rules for printing kernel architecture and localversion @ 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Cc: michal.lkml, linux-kbuild, yamada.masahiro, clang-built-linux, apw, joe, linux-riscv, info trivial rule to print out the kernel arch and localversion, so external tools, like distro packagers, can easily get it. Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> --- Makefile | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile index 3e4868a..5afc3de 100644 --- a/Makefile +++ b/Makefile @@ -1706,6 +1706,12 @@ kernelrelease: kernelversion: @echo $(KERNELVERSION) +kernellocalversion: + @$(CONFIG_SHELL) $(srctree)/scripts/setlocalversion $(srctree) | sed -e 's~^\-~~' + +kernelarch: + @echo $(ARCH) + image_name: @echo $(KBUILD_IMAGE) -- 1.9.1 _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/4] scripts: mkdebian: allow renaming generated debian/rules via env 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Cc: yamada.masahiro, michal.lkml, info, apw, joe, linux-kbuild, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux Add new environment variable KDEB_RULES for controlling where the generated debian rules are written to. By defaults, it's debian/rules, but packagers might override it for providing their own rules file. Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> --- scripts/package/mkdebian | 5 ++++- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/scripts/package/mkdebian b/scripts/package/mkdebian index 8351584..7a9ca4e 100755 --- a/scripts/package/mkdebian +++ b/scripts/package/mkdebian @@ -99,6 +99,9 @@ kernel_headers_packagename=linux-headers-$version dbg_packagename=$packagename-dbg debarch= set_debarch +if [ -z "$KDEB_RULES" ]; then + KDEB_RULES=debian/rules +fi if [ "$ARCH" = "um" ] ; then packagename=user-mode-linux-$version @@ -206,7 +209,7 @@ Description: Linux kernel debugging symbols for $version all the necessary debug symbols for the kernel and its modules. EOF -cat <<EOF > debian/rules +cat <<EOF > $KDEB_RULES #!$(command -v $MAKE) -f srctree ?= . -- 1.9.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 2/4] scripts: mkdebian: allow renaming generated debian/rules via env @ 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Cc: michal.lkml, linux-kbuild, yamada.masahiro, clang-built-linux, apw, joe, linux-riscv, info Add new environment variable KDEB_RULES for controlling where the generated debian rules are written to. By defaults, it's debian/rules, but packagers might override it for providing their own rules file. Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> --- scripts/package/mkdebian | 5 ++++- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/scripts/package/mkdebian b/scripts/package/mkdebian index 8351584..7a9ca4e 100755 --- a/scripts/package/mkdebian +++ b/scripts/package/mkdebian @@ -99,6 +99,9 @@ kernel_headers_packagename=linux-headers-$version dbg_packagename=$packagename-dbg debarch= set_debarch +if [ -z "$KDEB_RULES" ]; then + KDEB_RULES=debian/rules +fi if [ "$ARCH" = "um" ] ; then packagename=user-mode-linux-$version @@ -206,7 +209,7 @@ Description: Linux kernel debugging symbols for $version all the necessary debug symbols for the kernel and its modules. EOF -cat <<EOF > debian/rules +cat <<EOF > $KDEB_RULES #!$(command -v $MAKE) -f srctree ?= . -- 1.9.1 _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/4] scripts: checkpatch.pl: don't complain that debian/rules is executable 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Cc: yamada.masahiro, michal.lkml, info, apw, joe, linux-kbuild, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux checkpatch.pl complains when adding executable "debian/rules", obviously a false alarm. Therefore add an exception for that. Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> --- scripts/checkpatch.pl | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl index 342c7c7..caf0146 100755 --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl @@ -2587,6 +2587,7 @@ sub process { if ($line =~ /^new (file )?mode.*[7531]\d{0,2}$/) { my $permhere = $here . "FILE: $realfile\n"; if ($realfile !~ m@scripts/@ && + $realfile !~ "debian/rules" && $realfile !~ /\.(py|pl|awk|sh)$/) { ERROR("EXECUTE_PERMISSIONS", "do not set execute permissions for source files\n" . $permhere); -- 1.9.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 3/4] scripts: checkpatch.pl: don't complain that debian/rules is executable @ 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Cc: michal.lkml, linux-kbuild, yamada.masahiro, clang-built-linux, apw, joe, linux-riscv, info checkpatch.pl complains when adding executable "debian/rules", obviously a false alarm. Therefore add an exception for that. Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> --- scripts/checkpatch.pl | 1 + 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl index 342c7c7..caf0146 100755 --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl @@ -2587,6 +2587,7 @@ sub process { if ($line =~ /^new (file )?mode.*[7531]\d{0,2}$/) { my $permhere = $here . "FILE: $realfile\n"; if ($realfile !~ m@scripts/@ && + $realfile !~ "debian/rules" && $realfile !~ /\.(py|pl|awk|sh)$/) { ERROR("EXECUTE_PERMISSIONS", "do not set execute permissions for source files\n" . $permhere); -- 1.9.1 _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] scripts: checkpatch.pl: don't complain that debian/rules is executable 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 10:16 ` Joe Perches -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Joe Perches @ 2019-07-09 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, linux-kernel Cc: yamada.masahiro, michal.lkml, apw, linux-kbuild, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On Tue, 2019-07-09 at 11:32 +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > checkpatch.pl complains when adding executable "debian/rules", > obviously a false alarm. Therefore add an exception for that. > > Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> > --- > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > index 342c7c7..caf0146 100755 > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > @@ -2587,6 +2587,7 @@ sub process { > if ($line =~ /^new (file )?mode.*[7531]\d{0,2}$/) { > my $permhere = $here . "FILE: $realfile\n"; > if ($realfile !~ m@scripts/@ && > + $realfile !~ "debian/rules" && > $realfile !~ /\.(py|pl|awk|sh)$/) { > ERROR("EXECUTE_PERMISSIONS", > "do not set execute permissions for source files\n" . $permhere); There are several of these scripts that have no filename extension type and I suspect just adding debian/rules isn't all that valuable. $ git ls-files -s | grep '^100755' | grep -vP '\.(py|pl|awk|sh)$' | grep -v 'scripts/' 100755 b803f4f886b5e5e4046daedbd516e894f0f7e897 0 Documentation/target/target-export-device 100755 532d458333965b80f8f3ea149ad705208893b58f 0 arch/powerpc/boot/wrapper 100755 fbac1732f874e8d117b9c4aaf0a66b203370b933 0 arch/s390/kernel/syscalls/syscalltbl 100755 47c481239e986c35ba4818cb3e96f9ba7a813c2e 0 drivers/staging/greybus/tools/lbtest 100755 d7fc32ea8ac224f0fb6f28c58b196c665e510992 0 lib/build_OID_registry 100755 030a60b0404632ed598e5f5b56267e2a6af4b25f 0 samples/mic/mpssd/micctrl 100755 248ac7313c714d7acb29ceaaadd8fc8ee484e85e 0 samples/mic/mpssd/mpss 100755 2240cb56e6e5e6ed30a75913d4d5fecbb8f193c3 0 tools/debugging/kernel-chktaint 100755 ad1b9e646c4913b31aab9696245bc94b661647ff 0 tools/kvm/kvm_stat/kvm_stat 100755 49af9fe19f5b0533b64c117a363fc1c3785fa1da 0 tools/lib/lockdep/lockdep 100755 459469b7222c1410f7a701561eec004d86568369 0 tools/perf/arch/arm64/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl 100755 6c58060aa03beae7456e4f7cb0588e70207314be 0 tools/perf/arch/powerpc/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl 100755 72ecbb67637079f709262298981162b6cbb12c9f 0 tools/perf/arch/s390/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl 100755 fae26b1cf08f50a8c0caacf7bc0715e948ef0c03 0 tools/perf/tests/perf-targz-src-pkg 100755 3802cee5e1887f5b406324484832305e4a1b29b6 0 tools/perf/util/PERF-VERSION-GEN 100755 6d5e9e87c4b7f51f5904d17fa016a134563ba0d0 0 tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/ftracetest 100755 ea5938ec009a5eb9e28cb1778e081a568e66fd65 0 tools/testing/selftests/net/run_afpackettests 100755 14e41faf2c5740633f9dd30e500543647b736734 0 tools/testing/selftests/net/run_netsocktests 100755 4509f0cc9c918d33c39caf3372f2bcdfc81bceff 0 tools/testing/selftests/pstore/common_tests 100755 2a329bbb4aca3ad391a5aca9a67f554b060fdca2 0 tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_crash_test 100755 d6da5e86efbf89c7f4d7454d9a2c6a11ef2ea9e4 0 tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_post_reboot_tests 100755 1cef54458aff916b2f00af33deef703cb3101ab0 0 tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_tests 100755 951c507a27f7df05f82ce2de78abba2e0d9848f4 0 tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests Maybe setting an internal flag and looking at the file content for a shebang might be better. $ git ls-files -s | grep '^100755' | grep -vP '\.(py|pl|awk|sh)$'|grep -v 'scripts/'|awk '{print $4}'|while read file ; do echo "$file $(head -2 $file | grep '#!')" ; done Documentation/target/target-export-device #!/bin/sh arch/powerpc/boot/wrapper #!/bin/sh arch/s390/kernel/syscalls/syscalltbl #!/bin/sh drivers/staging/greybus/tools/lbtest #!/usr/bin/env python lib/build_OID_registry #!/usr/bin/perl -w samples/mic/mpssd/micctrl #!/bin/bash samples/mic/mpssd/mpss #!/bin/bash tools/debugging/kernel-chktaint #! /bin/sh tools/kvm/kvm_stat/kvm_stat #!/usr/bin/env python3 tools/lib/lockdep/lockdep #!/bin/bash tools/perf/arch/arm64/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl #!/bin/sh tools/perf/arch/powerpc/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl #!/bin/sh tools/perf/arch/s390/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl #!/bin/sh tools/perf/tests/perf-targz-src-pkg #!/bin/sh tools/perf/util/PERF-VERSION-GEN #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/ftracetest #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/net/run_afpackettests #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/net/run_netsocktests #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/pstore/common_tests #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_crash_test #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_post_reboot_tests #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_tests #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests #!/bin/bash ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 3/4] scripts: checkpatch.pl: don't complain that debian/rules is executable @ 2019-07-09 10:16 ` Joe Perches 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Joe Perches @ 2019-07-09 10:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, linux-kernel Cc: michal.lkml, clang-built-linux, linux-kbuild, yamada.masahiro, apw, linux-riscv On Tue, 2019-07-09 at 11:32 +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > checkpatch.pl complains when adding executable "debian/rules", > obviously a false alarm. Therefore add an exception for that. > > Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> > --- > scripts/checkpatch.pl | 1 + > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+) > > diff --git a/scripts/checkpatch.pl b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > index 342c7c7..caf0146 100755 > --- a/scripts/checkpatch.pl > +++ b/scripts/checkpatch.pl > @@ -2587,6 +2587,7 @@ sub process { > if ($line =~ /^new (file )?mode.*[7531]\d{0,2}$/) { > my $permhere = $here . "FILE: $realfile\n"; > if ($realfile !~ m@scripts/@ && > + $realfile !~ "debian/rules" && > $realfile !~ /\.(py|pl|awk|sh)$/) { > ERROR("EXECUTE_PERMISSIONS", > "do not set execute permissions for source files\n" . $permhere); There are several of these scripts that have no filename extension type and I suspect just adding debian/rules isn't all that valuable. $ git ls-files -s | grep '^100755' | grep -vP '\.(py|pl|awk|sh)$' | grep -v 'scripts/' 100755 b803f4f886b5e5e4046daedbd516e894f0f7e897 0 Documentation/target/target-export-device 100755 532d458333965b80f8f3ea149ad705208893b58f 0 arch/powerpc/boot/wrapper 100755 fbac1732f874e8d117b9c4aaf0a66b203370b933 0 arch/s390/kernel/syscalls/syscalltbl 100755 47c481239e986c35ba4818cb3e96f9ba7a813c2e 0 drivers/staging/greybus/tools/lbtest 100755 d7fc32ea8ac224f0fb6f28c58b196c665e510992 0 lib/build_OID_registry 100755 030a60b0404632ed598e5f5b56267e2a6af4b25f 0 samples/mic/mpssd/micctrl 100755 248ac7313c714d7acb29ceaaadd8fc8ee484e85e 0 samples/mic/mpssd/mpss 100755 2240cb56e6e5e6ed30a75913d4d5fecbb8f193c3 0 tools/debugging/kernel-chktaint 100755 ad1b9e646c4913b31aab9696245bc94b661647ff 0 tools/kvm/kvm_stat/kvm_stat 100755 49af9fe19f5b0533b64c117a363fc1c3785fa1da 0 tools/lib/lockdep/lockdep 100755 459469b7222c1410f7a701561eec004d86568369 0 tools/perf/arch/arm64/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl 100755 6c58060aa03beae7456e4f7cb0588e70207314be 0 tools/perf/arch/powerpc/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl 100755 72ecbb67637079f709262298981162b6cbb12c9f 0 tools/perf/arch/s390/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl 100755 fae26b1cf08f50a8c0caacf7bc0715e948ef0c03 0 tools/perf/tests/perf-targz-src-pkg 100755 3802cee5e1887f5b406324484832305e4a1b29b6 0 tools/perf/util/PERF-VERSION-GEN 100755 6d5e9e87c4b7f51f5904d17fa016a134563ba0d0 0 tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/ftracetest 100755 ea5938ec009a5eb9e28cb1778e081a568e66fd65 0 tools/testing/selftests/net/run_afpackettests 100755 14e41faf2c5740633f9dd30e500543647b736734 0 tools/testing/selftests/net/run_netsocktests 100755 4509f0cc9c918d33c39caf3372f2bcdfc81bceff 0 tools/testing/selftests/pstore/common_tests 100755 2a329bbb4aca3ad391a5aca9a67f554b060fdca2 0 tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_crash_test 100755 d6da5e86efbf89c7f4d7454d9a2c6a11ef2ea9e4 0 tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_post_reboot_tests 100755 1cef54458aff916b2f00af33deef703cb3101ab0 0 tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_tests 100755 951c507a27f7df05f82ce2de78abba2e0d9848f4 0 tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests Maybe setting an internal flag and looking at the file content for a shebang might be better. $ git ls-files -s | grep '^100755' | grep -vP '\.(py|pl|awk|sh)$'|grep -v 'scripts/'|awk '{print $4}'|while read file ; do echo "$file $(head -2 $file | grep '#!')" ; done Documentation/target/target-export-device #!/bin/sh arch/powerpc/boot/wrapper #!/bin/sh arch/s390/kernel/syscalls/syscalltbl #!/bin/sh drivers/staging/greybus/tools/lbtest #!/usr/bin/env python lib/build_OID_registry #!/usr/bin/perl -w samples/mic/mpssd/micctrl #!/bin/bash samples/mic/mpssd/mpss #!/bin/bash tools/debugging/kernel-chktaint #! /bin/sh tools/kvm/kvm_stat/kvm_stat #!/usr/bin/env python3 tools/lib/lockdep/lockdep #!/bin/bash tools/perf/arch/arm64/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl #!/bin/sh tools/perf/arch/powerpc/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl #!/bin/sh tools/perf/arch/s390/entry/syscalls/mksyscalltbl #!/bin/sh tools/perf/tests/perf-targz-src-pkg #!/bin/sh tools/perf/util/PERF-VERSION-GEN #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/ftrace/ftracetest #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/net/run_afpackettests #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/net/run_netsocktests #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/pstore/common_tests #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_crash_test #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_post_reboot_tests #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/pstore/pstore_tests #!/bin/sh tools/testing/selftests/vm/run_vmtests #!/bin/bash _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Cc: yamada.masahiro, michal.lkml, info, apw, joe, linux-kbuild, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux Adding a generic debian rule file, so we can build the directly via usual Debian package build tools (eg. git-buildpackage, dck-buildpackage, etc). It expects the .config file already placed in the source tree. The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, scripts/packaging/mkdebian. Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> --- .gitignore | 1 + MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++++ debian/rules | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+) create mode 100755 debian/rules diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore index 7587ef56..01d742c 100644 --- a/.gitignore +++ b/.gitignore @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@ modules.builtin # Debian directory (make deb-pkg) # /debian/ +!/debian/rules # # Snap directory (make snap-pkg) diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index 558acf2..56e034c 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -4516,6 +4516,12 @@ F: include/uapi/linux/dccp.h F: include/linux/tfrc.h F: net/dccp/ +DEBIAN PACKAGING FILES +M: Enrico Weigelt <info@metux.net> +L: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org +S: Maintained +F: debian/ + DECnet NETWORK LAYER W: http://linux-decnet.sourceforge.net L: linux-decnet-user@lists.sourceforge.net diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules new file mode 100755 index 0000000..c2f0319 --- /dev/null +++ b/debian/rules @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +#!/usr/bin/make -f +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +export MAKE +export KERNELARCH = $(shell $(MAKE) kernelarch) +export KERNELRELEASE = $(shell $(MAKE) kernelrelease) +export KBUILD_DEBARCH = $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH) +export KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION = $(shell $(MAKE) kernellocalversion) +export KDEB_RULES = debian/rules.auto +export KDEB_SOURCENAME = linux-source +export ARCH = $(KERNELARCH) + +debian/control debian/changelong debian/arch debian/copyright: +debian/control: + ./scripts/package/mkdebian + +build: debian/control + $(MAKE) KERNELRELEASE=$(KERNELRELEASE) ARCH=$(KERNELARCH) KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION=$(KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION) KBUILD_SRC= + +binary-arch: debian/control + $(MAKE) KERNELRELEASE=$(KERNELRELEASE) ARCH=$(KERNELARCH) KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION=$(KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION) KBUILD_SRC= intdeb-pkg + +clean: + rm -rf debian/*tmp debian/files debian/changelog debian/control debian/copyright debian/rules.auto debian/arch + $(MAKE) clean + +binary: binary-arch -- 1.9.1 ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file @ 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 9:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: linux-kernel Cc: michal.lkml, linux-kbuild, yamada.masahiro, clang-built-linux, apw, joe, linux-riscv, info Adding a generic debian rule file, so we can build the directly via usual Debian package build tools (eg. git-buildpackage, dck-buildpackage, etc). It expects the .config file already placed in the source tree. The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, scripts/packaging/mkdebian. Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> --- .gitignore | 1 + MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++++ debian/rules | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+) create mode 100755 debian/rules diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore index 7587ef56..01d742c 100644 --- a/.gitignore +++ b/.gitignore @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@ modules.builtin # Debian directory (make deb-pkg) # /debian/ +!/debian/rules # # Snap directory (make snap-pkg) diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS index 558acf2..56e034c 100644 --- a/MAINTAINERS +++ b/MAINTAINERS @@ -4516,6 +4516,12 @@ F: include/uapi/linux/dccp.h F: include/linux/tfrc.h F: net/dccp/ +DEBIAN PACKAGING FILES +M: Enrico Weigelt <info@metux.net> +L: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org +S: Maintained +F: debian/ + DECnet NETWORK LAYER W: http://linux-decnet.sourceforge.net L: linux-decnet-user@lists.sourceforge.net diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules new file mode 100755 index 0000000..c2f0319 --- /dev/null +++ b/debian/rules @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ +#!/usr/bin/make -f +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 + +export MAKE +export KERNELARCH = $(shell $(MAKE) kernelarch) +export KERNELRELEASE = $(shell $(MAKE) kernelrelease) +export KBUILD_DEBARCH = $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH) +export KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION = $(shell $(MAKE) kernellocalversion) +export KDEB_RULES = debian/rules.auto +export KDEB_SOURCENAME = linux-source +export ARCH = $(KERNELARCH) + +debian/control debian/changelong debian/arch debian/copyright: +debian/control: + ./scripts/package/mkdebian + +build: debian/control + $(MAKE) KERNELRELEASE=$(KERNELRELEASE) ARCH=$(KERNELARCH) KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION=$(KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION) KBUILD_SRC= + +binary-arch: debian/control + $(MAKE) KERNELRELEASE=$(KERNELRELEASE) ARCH=$(KERNELARCH) KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION=$(KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION) KBUILD_SRC= intdeb-pkg + +clean: + rm -rf debian/*tmp debian/files debian/changelog debian/control debian/copyright debian/rules.auto debian/arch + $(MAKE) clean + +binary: binary-arch -- 1.9.1 _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-15 12:28 ` Masahiro Yamada -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2019-07-15 12:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 6:33 PM Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> wrote: > > Adding a generic debian rule file, so we can build the directly > via usual Debian package build tools (eg. git-buildpackage, > dck-buildpackage, etc). It expects the .config file already > placed in the source tree. > > The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and > other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, > scripts/packaging/mkdebian. I saw a similar patch submission before, and negative feedback about it. Debian maintains its own debian/rules, and it is fine. I do not like to check-in the one in the kernel tree. > Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> > --- > .gitignore | 1 + > MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++++ > debian/rules | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+) > create mode 100755 debian/rules > > diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore > index 7587ef56..01d742c 100644 > --- a/.gitignore > +++ b/.gitignore > @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@ modules.builtin > # Debian directory (make deb-pkg) > # > /debian/ > +!/debian/rules > > # > # Snap directory (make snap-pkg) > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index 558acf2..56e034c 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -4516,6 +4516,12 @@ F: include/uapi/linux/dccp.h > F: include/linux/tfrc.h > F: net/dccp/ > > +DEBIAN PACKAGING FILES > +M: Enrico Weigelt <info@metux.net> > +L: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org > +S: Maintained > +F: debian/ > + > DECnet NETWORK LAYER > W: http://linux-decnet.sourceforge.net > L: linux-decnet-user@lists.sourceforge.net > diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules > new file mode 100755 > index 0000000..c2f0319 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/debian/rules > @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ > +#!/usr/bin/make -f > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > + > +export MAKE > +export KERNELARCH = $(shell $(MAKE) kernelarch) > +export KERNELRELEASE = $(shell $(MAKE) kernelrelease) > +export KBUILD_DEBARCH = $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH) > +export KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION = $(shell $(MAKE) kernellocalversion) > +export KDEB_RULES = debian/rules.auto > +export KDEB_SOURCENAME = linux-source > +export ARCH = $(KERNELARCH) > + > +debian/control debian/changelong debian/arch debian/copyright: > +debian/control: > + ./scripts/package/mkdebian > + > +build: debian/control > + $(MAKE) KERNELRELEASE=$(KERNELRELEASE) ARCH=$(KERNELARCH) KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION=$(KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION) KBUILD_SRC= > + > +binary-arch: debian/control > + $(MAKE) KERNELRELEASE=$(KERNELRELEASE) ARCH=$(KERNELARCH) KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION=$(KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION) KBUILD_SRC= intdeb-pkg > + > +clean: > + rm -rf debian/*tmp debian/files debian/changelog debian/control debian/copyright debian/rules.auto debian/arch > + $(MAKE) clean > + > +binary: binary-arch > -- > 1.9.1 > -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file @ 2019-07-15 12:28 ` Masahiro Yamada 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2019-07-15 12:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Cc: Michal Marek, Linux Kbuild mailing list, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Joe Perches, clang-built-linux, Robo Bot, linux-riscv On Tue, Jul 9, 2019 at 6:33 PM Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> wrote: > > Adding a generic debian rule file, so we can build the directly > via usual Debian package build tools (eg. git-buildpackage, > dck-buildpackage, etc). It expects the .config file already > placed in the source tree. > > The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and > other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, > scripts/packaging/mkdebian. I saw a similar patch submission before, and negative feedback about it. Debian maintains its own debian/rules, and it is fine. I do not like to check-in the one in the kernel tree. > Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> > --- > .gitignore | 1 + > MAINTAINERS | 6 ++++++ > debian/rules | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 3 files changed, 34 insertions(+) > create mode 100755 debian/rules > > diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore > index 7587ef56..01d742c 100644 > --- a/.gitignore > +++ b/.gitignore > @@ -69,6 +69,7 @@ modules.builtin > # Debian directory (make deb-pkg) > # > /debian/ > +!/debian/rules > > # > # Snap directory (make snap-pkg) > diff --git a/MAINTAINERS b/MAINTAINERS > index 558acf2..56e034c 100644 > --- a/MAINTAINERS > +++ b/MAINTAINERS > @@ -4516,6 +4516,12 @@ F: include/uapi/linux/dccp.h > F: include/linux/tfrc.h > F: net/dccp/ > > +DEBIAN PACKAGING FILES > +M: Enrico Weigelt <info@metux.net> > +L: linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org > +S: Maintained > +F: debian/ > + > DECnet NETWORK LAYER > W: http://linux-decnet.sourceforge.net > L: linux-decnet-user@lists.sourceforge.net > diff --git a/debian/rules b/debian/rules > new file mode 100755 > index 0000000..c2f0319 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/debian/rules > @@ -0,0 +1,27 @@ > +#!/usr/bin/make -f > +# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 > + > +export MAKE > +export KERNELARCH = $(shell $(MAKE) kernelarch) > +export KERNELRELEASE = $(shell $(MAKE) kernelrelease) > +export KBUILD_DEBARCH = $(shell dpkg-architecture -qDEB_HOST_ARCH) > +export KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION = $(shell $(MAKE) kernellocalversion) > +export KDEB_RULES = debian/rules.auto > +export KDEB_SOURCENAME = linux-source > +export ARCH = $(KERNELARCH) > + > +debian/control debian/changelong debian/arch debian/copyright: > +debian/control: > + ./scripts/package/mkdebian > + > +build: debian/control > + $(MAKE) KERNELRELEASE=$(KERNELRELEASE) ARCH=$(KERNELARCH) KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION=$(KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION) KBUILD_SRC= > + > +binary-arch: debian/control > + $(MAKE) KERNELRELEASE=$(KERNELRELEASE) ARCH=$(KERNELARCH) KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION=$(KBUILD_BUILD_VERSION) KBUILD_SRC= intdeb-pkg > + > +clean: > + rm -rf debian/*tmp debian/files debian/changelog debian/control debian/copyright debian/rules.auto debian/arch > + $(MAKE) clean > + > +binary: binary-arch > -- > 1.9.1 > -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file 2019-07-15 12:28 ` Masahiro Yamada @ 2019-07-15 18:56 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-15 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Masahiro Yamada, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On 15.07.19 14:28, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >> The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and >> other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, >> scripts/packaging/mkdebian. > > I saw a similar patch submission before, and negative feedback about it. Do you recall what negative feedback exactly ? > Debian maintains its own debian/rules, and it is fine. Not for me, I don't use it - given up trying to make anything useful out of it. It's extremly complex, practically undebuggable and doesn't even work w/o lots of external preparations. --mtx -- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Free software and Linux embedded engineering info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file @ 2019-07-15 18:56 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-15 18:56 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Masahiro Yamada, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Cc: Michal Marek, Linux Kbuild mailing list, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Joe Perches, clang-built-linux, Robo Bot, linux-riscv On 15.07.19 14:28, Masahiro Yamada wrote: >> The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and >> other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, >> scripts/packaging/mkdebian. > > I saw a similar patch submission before, and negative feedback about it. Do you recall what negative feedback exactly ? > Debian maintains its own debian/rules, and it is fine. Not for me, I don't use it - given up trying to make anything useful out of it. It's extremly complex, practically undebuggable and doesn't even work w/o lots of external preparations. --mtx -- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Free software and Linux embedded engineering info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287 _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file 2019-07-15 18:56 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-15 19:12 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Theodore Y. Ts'o @ 2019-07-15 19:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Cc: Masahiro Yamada, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 08:56:25PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > On 15.07.19 14:28, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > >> The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and > >> other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, > >> scripts/packaging/mkdebian. > > > > I saw a similar patch submission before, and negative feedback about it. > > Do you recall what negative feedback exactly ? It's possible I'm not remembering some of the feedback, but the only thing I recall was the comment I made that I'd really like this use case: make O=/build/linux-build bindeb-pkg to not break. And as far as I can tell from the proposed patch series (I haven't had a chance to experimentally verify it yet), I don't think it should break anything --- I'm assuming that we will still have a way of creating the debian/rules file in /build/linux-build/debian/rules when doing a O= build, and that the intdeb-pkg rule remains the same. At least, it appears to be the case from my doing a quick look at the patches. > > Debian maintains its own debian/rules, and it is fine. > > Not for me, I don't use it - given up trying to make anything useful > out of it. It's extremly complex, practically undebuggable and doesn't > even work w/o lots of external preparations. Yeah, the official Debian debian/rules is optimized for doing a distribution release, and in addition to the issues Enrico has raised, last time I tried it, it was S-L-O-W since it was building a fully generic kernel. It's not at all useable for general developer use. It sounds like what Enrico is trying to do is to enable running "dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -b" from the the top-level kernel package as being easier than running "make bindeb-pkg". I suspect this might be because his goal is to integrate individual kernel builds from using Debian's hermetic build / chroot systems (e.g., sbuild, pbuilder)? - Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file @ 2019-07-15 19:12 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Theodore Y. Ts'o @ 2019-07-15 19:12 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Cc: Michal Marek, Linux Kbuild mailing list, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Masahiro Yamada, clang-built-linux, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, linux-riscv, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 08:56:25PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > On 15.07.19 14:28, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > >> The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and > >> other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, > >> scripts/packaging/mkdebian. > > > > I saw a similar patch submission before, and negative feedback about it. > > Do you recall what negative feedback exactly ? It's possible I'm not remembering some of the feedback, but the only thing I recall was the comment I made that I'd really like this use case: make O=/build/linux-build bindeb-pkg to not break. And as far as I can tell from the proposed patch series (I haven't had a chance to experimentally verify it yet), I don't think it should break anything --- I'm assuming that we will still have a way of creating the debian/rules file in /build/linux-build/debian/rules when doing a O= build, and that the intdeb-pkg rule remains the same. At least, it appears to be the case from my doing a quick look at the patches. > > Debian maintains its own debian/rules, and it is fine. > > Not for me, I don't use it - given up trying to make anything useful > out of it. It's extremly complex, practically undebuggable and doesn't > even work w/o lots of external preparations. Yeah, the official Debian debian/rules is optimized for doing a distribution release, and in addition to the issues Enrico has raised, last time I tried it, it was S-L-O-W since it was building a fully generic kernel. It's not at all useable for general developer use. It sounds like what Enrico is trying to do is to enable running "dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -b" from the the top-level kernel package as being easier than running "make bindeb-pkg". I suspect this might be because his goal is to integrate individual kernel builds from using Debian's hermetic build / chroot systems (e.g., sbuild, pbuilder)? - Ted _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file 2019-07-15 19:12 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o @ 2019-07-16 8:58 ` Masahiro Yamada -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2019-07-16 8:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Theodore Y. Ts'o, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Masahiro Yamada, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 4:13 AM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 08:56:25PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > > On 15.07.19 14:28, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > > >> The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and > > >> other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, > > >> scripts/packaging/mkdebian. > > > > > > I saw a similar patch submission before, and negative feedback about it. > > > > Do you recall what negative feedback exactly ? Sorry, my memory was broken. I did not like this patch set from the beginning, but missed to express my opinion strongly. I want debian/ to be kept as a drop-in directory for packagers, without replacing the upstream debian/rules. If a check-in source file is modified in anyway, scripts/setlocalversion would set -dirty flag, which I want to avoid. > It's possible I'm not remembering some of the feedback, but the only > thing I recall was the comment I made that I'd really like this use > case: > > make O=/build/linux-build bindeb-pkg > > to not break. And as far as I can tell from the proposed patch series > (I haven't had a chance to experimentally verify it yet), I don't > think it should break anything --- I'm assuming that we will still > have a way of creating the debian/rules file in > /build/linux-build/debian/rules when doing a O= build, and that the > intdeb-pkg rule remains the same. At least, it appears to be the case > from my doing a quick look at the patches. > > > > Debian maintains its own debian/rules, and it is fine. > > > > Not for me, I don't use it - given up trying to make anything useful > > out of it. It's extremly complex, practically undebuggable and doesn't > > even work w/o lots of external preparations. > > Yeah, the official Debian debian/rules is optimized for doing a > distribution release, and in addition to the issues Enrico has raised, > last time I tried it, it was S-L-O-W since it was building a fully > generic kernel. It's not at all useable for general developer use. It is OK if the package is targeting normal users instead of kernel developers. > It sounds like what Enrico is trying to do is to enable running > "dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -b" from the the top-level kernel package > as being easier than running "make bindeb-pkg". I suspect this might > be because his goal is to integrate individual kernel builds from > using Debian's hermetic build / chroot systems (e.g., sbuild, pbuilder)? I am OK with generating debian/rules with 'make bindeb-pkg', a shell scripts or whatever, but I dislike to commit it in upstream git tree. debian/rules is a hook for packagers to do their jobs in downstream. "We kindly committed a generic one for you" sounds weird to me. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file @ 2019-07-16 8:58 ` Masahiro Yamada 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Masahiro Yamada @ 2019-07-16 8:58 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Theodore Y. Ts'o, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Masahiro Yamada, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 4:13 AM Theodore Y. Ts'o <tytso@mit.edu> wrote: > > On Mon, Jul 15, 2019 at 08:56:25PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > > On 15.07.19 14:28, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > > > > >> The rule file contains a rule for creating debian/control and > > >> other metadata - this is done similar to the 'deb-pkg' make rule, > > >> scripts/packaging/mkdebian. > > > > > > I saw a similar patch submission before, and negative feedback about it. > > > > Do you recall what negative feedback exactly ? Sorry, my memory was broken. I did not like this patch set from the beginning, but missed to express my opinion strongly. I want debian/ to be kept as a drop-in directory for packagers, without replacing the upstream debian/rules. If a check-in source file is modified in anyway, scripts/setlocalversion would set -dirty flag, which I want to avoid. > It's possible I'm not remembering some of the feedback, but the only > thing I recall was the comment I made that I'd really like this use > case: > > make O=/build/linux-build bindeb-pkg > > to not break. And as far as I can tell from the proposed patch series > (I haven't had a chance to experimentally verify it yet), I don't > think it should break anything --- I'm assuming that we will still > have a way of creating the debian/rules file in > /build/linux-build/debian/rules when doing a O= build, and that the > intdeb-pkg rule remains the same. At least, it appears to be the case > from my doing a quick look at the patches. > > > > Debian maintains its own debian/rules, and it is fine. > > > > Not for me, I don't use it - given up trying to make anything useful > > out of it. It's extremly complex, practically undebuggable and doesn't > > even work w/o lots of external preparations. > > Yeah, the official Debian debian/rules is optimized for doing a > distribution release, and in addition to the issues Enrico has raised, > last time I tried it, it was S-L-O-W since it was building a fully > generic kernel. It's not at all useable for general developer use. It is OK if the package is targeting normal users instead of kernel developers. > It sounds like what Enrico is trying to do is to enable running > "dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -b" from the the top-level kernel package > as being easier than running "make bindeb-pkg". I suspect this might > be because his goal is to integrate individual kernel builds from > using Debian's hermetic build / chroot systems (e.g., sbuild, pbuilder)? I am OK with generating debian/rules with 'make bindeb-pkg', a shell scripts or whatever, but I dislike to commit it in upstream git tree. debian/rules is a hook for packagers to do their jobs in downstream. "We kindly committed a generic one for you" sounds weird to me. -- Best Regards Masahiro Yamada _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file 2019-07-16 8:58 ` Masahiro Yamada @ 2019-07-16 12:34 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Theodore Y. Ts'o @ 2019-07-16 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Masahiro Yamada Cc: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 05:58:49PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > I want debian/ to be kept as a drop-in directory > for packagers, without replacing the upstream debian/rules. > > If a check-in source file is modified in anyway, > scripts/setlocalversion would set -dirty flag, > which I want to avoid. In practice, that's not going to be a problem for most distributions. The traditional way Debian-derived systems have done builds is completely outside of git. So there will be a linux_5.2.orig.tar.gz and a linux_5.2-1.debian.tar.xz. dpkg_source -x will first unpackage the orig.tar.gz, and then the debian.tar.xz, and if the second overwrites the first, it's no big deal. More modern Debian package maintainer workflows may be using git, but in that case, all of the "Debianizations" are reflected in a separate branch. So it's not going to set the -dirty flag. There will be potential merge conflicts between Enrico's proposed "upstream default debian/rules" file and the Debian/Ubuntu debian/rules file on their distro branch. However, I don't think that's a big issue, for two reasons. First, once it's checked in, I expect changes to the default debian/rules file will be relatively rare. Secondly, it's easy enough to use gitattributes and defining a custom merge driver so that a distribution can configure things so that they always use the version of debian/rules from their branch, so the merge conflict resolution can be set up to always do the right thing. There are certainly other upstreams which ship their own debian/ directories. E2fsprogs is one such example, but in that case I'm cheating because I'm both the Debian package maintainer as well as the upstream maintainer. :-) However, it's never been an issue for Ubuntu when they choose to ship their own customized debian/rules file. > debian/rules is a hook for packagers to do their jobs in downstream. > "We kindly committed a generic one for you" sounds weird to me. It is weird, and it's not common for upstream packages (which are not native Debian packages) to ship their own debian directory. But it certainly does happen, and it won't cause any problems in actual practice. Regards, - Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file @ 2019-07-16 12:34 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Theodore Y. Ts'o @ 2019-07-16 12:34 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Masahiro Yamada Cc: Michal Marek, Linux Kbuild mailing list, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Joe Perches, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, clang-built-linux, Robo Bot, linux-riscv, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult On Tue, Jul 16, 2019 at 05:58:49PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote: > I want debian/ to be kept as a drop-in directory > for packagers, without replacing the upstream debian/rules. > > If a check-in source file is modified in anyway, > scripts/setlocalversion would set -dirty flag, > which I want to avoid. In practice, that's not going to be a problem for most distributions. The traditional way Debian-derived systems have done builds is completely outside of git. So there will be a linux_5.2.orig.tar.gz and a linux_5.2-1.debian.tar.xz. dpkg_source -x will first unpackage the orig.tar.gz, and then the debian.tar.xz, and if the second overwrites the first, it's no big deal. More modern Debian package maintainer workflows may be using git, but in that case, all of the "Debianizations" are reflected in a separate branch. So it's not going to set the -dirty flag. There will be potential merge conflicts between Enrico's proposed "upstream default debian/rules" file and the Debian/Ubuntu debian/rules file on their distro branch. However, I don't think that's a big issue, for two reasons. First, once it's checked in, I expect changes to the default debian/rules file will be relatively rare. Secondly, it's easy enough to use gitattributes and defining a custom merge driver so that a distribution can configure things so that they always use the version of debian/rules from their branch, so the merge conflict resolution can be set up to always do the right thing. There are certainly other upstreams which ship their own debian/ directories. E2fsprogs is one such example, but in that case I'm cheating because I'm both the Debian package maintainer as well as the upstream maintainer. :-) However, it's never been an issue for Ubuntu when they choose to ship their own customized debian/rules file. > debian/rules is a hook for packagers to do their jobs in downstream. > "We kindly committed a generic one for you" sounds weird to me. It is weird, and it's not common for upstream packages (which are not native Debian packages) to ship their own debian directory. But it certainly does happen, and it won't cause any problems in actual practice. Regards, - Ted _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file 2019-07-16 12:34 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o @ 2019-07-17 14:16 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-17 14:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Theodore Y. Ts'o, Masahiro Yamada, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On 16.07.19 14:34, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: Hi, > In practice, that's not going to be a problem for most distributions. > The traditional way Debian-derived systems have done builds is > completely outside of git. So there will be a linux_5.2.orig.tar.gz > and a linux_5.2-1.debian.tar.xz. dpkg_source -x will first unpackage > the orig.tar.gz, and then the debian.tar.xz, and if the second > overwrites the first, it's no big deal. ACK. IIRC they already filter out debian/ directories when generating upstream tarballs - other upstreams already provide their debian/ stuff, too. > First, once it's checked in, I expect changes to the default > debian/rules file will be relatively rare. ACK. I currently don't see much reasons for future changes. If anybody sees something missing, just let me know, and I'll take it up for the next review round. --mtx -- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Free software and Linux embedded engineering info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file @ 2019-07-17 14:16 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-17 14:16 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Theodore Y. Ts'o, Masahiro Yamada, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On 16.07.19 14:34, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: Hi, > In practice, that's not going to be a problem for most distributions. > The traditional way Debian-derived systems have done builds is > completely outside of git. So there will be a linux_5.2.orig.tar.gz > and a linux_5.2-1.debian.tar.xz. dpkg_source -x will first unpackage > the orig.tar.gz, and then the debian.tar.xz, and if the second > overwrites the first, it's no big deal. ACK. IIRC they already filter out debian/ directories when generating upstream tarballs - other upstreams already provide their debian/ stuff, too. > First, once it's checked in, I expect changes to the default > debian/rules file will be relatively rare. ACK. I currently don't see much reasons for future changes. If anybody sees something missing, just let me know, and I'll take it up for the next review round. --mtx -- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Free software and Linux embedded engineering info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287 _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file 2019-07-17 14:16 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-17 15:23 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Theodore Y. Ts'o @ 2019-07-17 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Cc: Masahiro Yamada, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 04:16:39PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > > > In practice, that's not going to be a problem for most distributions. > > The traditional way Debian-derived systems have done builds is > > completely outside of git. So there will be a linux_5.2.orig.tar.gz > > and a linux_5.2-1.debian.tar.xz. dpkg_source -x will first unpackage > > the orig.tar.gz, and then the debian.tar.xz, and if the second > > overwrites the first, it's no big deal. > > ACK. IIRC they already filter out debian/ directories when generating > upstream tarballs - other upstreams already provide their debian/ > stuff, too. Well, no, actually they don't. That's because as much as possible they want the upstream tarball to be bit-for-bit identical to the one published on the official upstream distribution site. That allows them to include the detached PGP signature from the upstream maintainer, if one is provided. If there are files in the upstream debian/ directory that they don't need, they can delete in the distro's debian/rules file. Ideally, so we shouldn't include files in the Linux kernel's debian/ directory willy-nilly. But the debian/rules file will *always* be present, and so it will be overwritten by the <package>_<ver>.debian.tar.xz file, and so it's no big deal. - Ted ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file @ 2019-07-17 15:23 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Theodore Y. Ts'o @ 2019-07-17 15:23 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Cc: Michal Marek, Linux Kbuild mailing list, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Masahiro Yamada, clang-built-linux, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, linux-riscv, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult On Wed, Jul 17, 2019 at 04:16:39PM +0200, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > > > In practice, that's not going to be a problem for most distributions. > > The traditional way Debian-derived systems have done builds is > > completely outside of git. So there will be a linux_5.2.orig.tar.gz > > and a linux_5.2-1.debian.tar.xz. dpkg_source -x will first unpackage > > the orig.tar.gz, and then the debian.tar.xz, and if the second > > overwrites the first, it's no big deal. > > ACK. IIRC they already filter out debian/ directories when generating > upstream tarballs - other upstreams already provide their debian/ > stuff, too. Well, no, actually they don't. That's because as much as possible they want the upstream tarball to be bit-for-bit identical to the one published on the official upstream distribution site. That allows them to include the detached PGP signature from the upstream maintainer, if one is provided. If there are files in the upstream debian/ directory that they don't need, they can delete in the distro's debian/rules file. Ideally, so we shouldn't include files in the Linux kernel's debian/ directory willy-nilly. But the debian/rules file will *always* be present, and so it will be overwritten by the <package>_<ver>.debian.tar.xz file, and so it's no big deal. - Ted _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file 2019-07-15 19:12 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o @ 2019-07-17 11:08 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-17 11:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Theodore Y. Ts'o, Masahiro Yamada, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On 15.07.19 21:12, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: Hi, > It's possible I'm not remembering some of the feedback, but the only> thing I recall was the comment I made that I'd really like this use> case:> > make O=/build/linux-build bindeb-pkg ah, I yet wanted to test that - thx for reminding me. > to not break. And as far as I can tell from the proposed patch series> (I haven't had a chance to experimentally verify it yet), I don't> think it should break anything --- I'm assuming that we will still> have a way of creating the debian/rules file in> /build/linux-build/debian/rules when doing a O= build, and that the> intdeb-pkg rule remains the same. At least, it appears to be the case> from my doing a quick look at the patches. Yes (unless i've missed something), everything should remain as it is. One thing that could happen (not checked yet) is that running good old 'make bindeb-pkg' without O=... could overwrite the now already existing debian/rules file. If that's really a problem, we could tweak the machinery to use a different name for the rule file (for now, one the preceeding patch just allows giving a different name for just *generating* the rules file). Another idea could be rewriting the whole process so that no rules file needs to be generated at all. > Yeah, the official Debian debian/rules is optimized for doing a > distribution release, and in addition to the issues Enrico has raised, > last time I tried it, it was S-L-O-W since it was building a fully > generic kernel. It's not at all useable for general developer use. I'm a bit reluctant calling this 'optimized' :p The strangest aspect (IMHO) is they're building several different trees (w/ different huge patch queues) from only one source package. Instead I'd rather: * try to get as much as possible in one tree * have separate source packages if there really need to be separate patche queues (IMHO, these things, like RT stuff, just need proper Kconfig's) * do all the patching in git and skip the text-based patches entirely Haven't found out, why they're actually doing it that complicated way (didn't get any useful answers from debian kernel folks) > It sounds like what Enrico is trying to do is to enable running > "dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -b" from the the top-level kernel package > as being easier than running "make bindeb-pkg". I suspect this might > be because his goal is to integrate individual kernel builds from > using Debian's hermetic build / chroot systems (e.g., sbuild, pbuilder)? Yes, I'm building all deb's by the same process / infrastructure. In my case it's dck-buildpackage (*1) which runs the build in a docker container (kinda pbuilder w/ docker). It always starts with a fresh (minimal) base image, calls debian/rules to create debian/control (if necessary) deploys the dependencies found in the control file and finally fire's up dpkg-buildpackage - the output is collected in an ready-to-use apt repo. The goal of this is having a canonical build process for all deb packages, not having to care of any special cases anymore. I also have another tool ontop of that, which runs the whole show for dozens of packages and targets (*2). My first approach was trying to use Debian source packages with new kernel trees, but had to give up after a few days. Then I've found out that the kernel already has *almost* what I needed. The difference between almost and fine is this patch queue (minus local .config files) --mtx -- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Free software and Linux embedded engineering info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file @ 2019-07-17 11:08 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-17 11:08 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Theodore Y. Ts'o, Masahiro Yamada, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, Linux Kernel Mailing List, Michal Marek, Robo Bot, Joe Perches, Linux Kbuild mailing list, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On 15.07.19 21:12, Theodore Y. Ts'o wrote: Hi, > It's possible I'm not remembering some of the feedback, but the only> thing I recall was the comment I made that I'd really like this use> case:> > make O=/build/linux-build bindeb-pkg ah, I yet wanted to test that - thx for reminding me. > to not break. And as far as I can tell from the proposed patch series> (I haven't had a chance to experimentally verify it yet), I don't> think it should break anything --- I'm assuming that we will still> have a way of creating the debian/rules file in> /build/linux-build/debian/rules when doing a O= build, and that the> intdeb-pkg rule remains the same. At least, it appears to be the case> from my doing a quick look at the patches. Yes (unless i've missed something), everything should remain as it is. One thing that could happen (not checked yet) is that running good old 'make bindeb-pkg' without O=... could overwrite the now already existing debian/rules file. If that's really a problem, we could tweak the machinery to use a different name for the rule file (for now, one the preceeding patch just allows giving a different name for just *generating* the rules file). Another idea could be rewriting the whole process so that no rules file needs to be generated at all. > Yeah, the official Debian debian/rules is optimized for doing a > distribution release, and in addition to the issues Enrico has raised, > last time I tried it, it was S-L-O-W since it was building a fully > generic kernel. It's not at all useable for general developer use. I'm a bit reluctant calling this 'optimized' :p The strangest aspect (IMHO) is they're building several different trees (w/ different huge patch queues) from only one source package. Instead I'd rather: * try to get as much as possible in one tree * have separate source packages if there really need to be separate patche queues (IMHO, these things, like RT stuff, just need proper Kconfig's) * do all the patching in git and skip the text-based patches entirely Haven't found out, why they're actually doing it that complicated way (didn't get any useful answers from debian kernel folks) > It sounds like what Enrico is trying to do is to enable running > "dpkg-buildpackage -us -uc -b" from the the top-level kernel package > as being easier than running "make bindeb-pkg". I suspect this might > be because his goal is to integrate individual kernel builds from > using Debian's hermetic build / chroot systems (e.g., sbuild, pbuilder)? Yes, I'm building all deb's by the same process / infrastructure. In my case it's dck-buildpackage (*1) which runs the build in a docker container (kinda pbuilder w/ docker). It always starts with a fresh (minimal) base image, calls debian/rules to create debian/control (if necessary) deploys the dependencies found in the control file and finally fire's up dpkg-buildpackage - the output is collected in an ready-to-use apt repo. The goal of this is having a canonical build process for all deb packages, not having to care of any special cases anymore. I also have another tool ontop of that, which runs the whole show for dozens of packages and targets (*2). My first approach was trying to use Debian source packages with new kernel trees, but had to give up after a few days. Then I've found out that the kernel already has *almost* what I needed. The difference between almost and fine is this patch queue (minus local .config files) --mtx -- Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult Free software and Linux embedded engineering info@metux.net -- +49-151-27565287 _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/4] Makefile: rules for printing kernel architecture and localversion 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult @ 2019-07-09 14:54 ` Randy Dunlap -1 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Randy Dunlap @ 2019-07-09 14:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, linux-kernel Cc: yamada.masahiro, michal.lkml, apw, joe, linux-kbuild, linux-riscv, clang-built-linux On 7/9/19 2:32 AM, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > trivial rule to print out the kernel arch and localversion, so > external tools, like distro packagers, can easily get it. > > Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> Hi, If accepted, these targets should be added to the top level Makefile's "make help" output also. Thanks. > --- > Makefile | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > index 3e4868a..5afc3de 100644 > --- a/Makefile > +++ b/Makefile > @@ -1706,6 +1706,12 @@ kernelrelease: > kernelversion: > @echo $(KERNELVERSION) > > +kernellocalversion: > + @$(CONFIG_SHELL) $(srctree)/scripts/setlocalversion $(srctree) | sed -e 's~^\-~~' > + > +kernelarch: > + @echo $(ARCH) > + > image_name: > @echo $(KBUILD_IMAGE) > > -- ~Randy ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 1/4] Makefile: rules for printing kernel architecture and localversion @ 2019-07-09 14:54 ` Randy Dunlap 0 siblings, 0 replies; 28+ messages in thread From: Randy Dunlap @ 2019-07-09 14:54 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult, linux-kernel Cc: michal.lkml, linux-kbuild, yamada.masahiro, clang-built-linux, apw, joe, linux-riscv On 7/9/19 2:32 AM, Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult wrote: > trivial rule to print out the kernel arch and localversion, so > external tools, like distro packagers, can easily get it. > > Signed-off-by: Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult <info@metux.net> Hi, If accepted, these targets should be added to the top level Makefile's "make help" output also. Thanks. > --- > Makefile | 6 ++++++ > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile > index 3e4868a..5afc3de 100644 > --- a/Makefile > +++ b/Makefile > @@ -1706,6 +1706,12 @@ kernelrelease: > kernelversion: > @echo $(KERNELVERSION) > > +kernellocalversion: > + @$(CONFIG_SHELL) $(srctree)/scripts/setlocalversion $(srctree) | sed -e 's~^\-~~' > + > +kernelarch: > + @echo $(ARCH) > + > image_name: > @echo $(KBUILD_IMAGE) > > -- ~Randy _______________________________________________ linux-riscv mailing list linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 28+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2019-07-17 15:24 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 28+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2019-07-09 9:32 [PATCH 1/4] Makefile: rules for printing kernel architecture and localversion Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-09 9:32 ` [PATCH 2/4] scripts: mkdebian: allow renaming generated debian/rules via env Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-09 9:32 ` [PATCH 3/4] scripts: checkpatch.pl: don't complain that debian/rules is executable Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-09 10:16 ` Joe Perches 2019-07-09 10:16 ` Joe Perches 2019-07-09 9:32 ` [PATCH 4/4] debian: add generic rule file Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-09 9:32 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-15 12:28 ` Masahiro Yamada 2019-07-15 12:28 ` Masahiro Yamada 2019-07-15 18:56 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-15 18:56 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-15 19:12 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2019-07-15 19:12 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2019-07-16 8:58 ` Masahiro Yamada 2019-07-16 8:58 ` Masahiro Yamada 2019-07-16 12:34 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2019-07-16 12:34 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2019-07-17 14:16 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-17 14:16 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-17 15:23 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2019-07-17 15:23 ` Theodore Y. Ts'o 2019-07-17 11:08 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-17 11:08 ` Enrico Weigelt, metux IT consult 2019-07-09 14:54 ` [PATCH 1/4] Makefile: rules for printing kernel architecture and localversion Randy Dunlap 2019-07-09 14:54 ` Randy Dunlap
This is an external index of several public inboxes, see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror all data and code used by this external index.