Re: [Xenomai-help] Compiling Linux+Xenomai 32bits kernel on FC6 x86_64?

[Jan Kiszka <jan.kiszka@domain.hid>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2076 bytes --]

Jeff Webb wrote:
> Jan Kiszka wrote:
>> Hmm, that tickles my fantasy once again: Could we derive generic .specs
>> from your files to include them in the Xenomai distribution? Then some
>> additional Makefile rules could provide a "make rpm" that generates
>> packages for kernel and userland (when given some kernel.tar.bz2).
>> Basically, your steps generalised and automated.
> 
> That would be great.  I started with the 'mkspec' script from the
> vanilla kernel tree, and added a few things that make the resulting RPMs
> work better with Fedora.  I'm not sure how other distributions handle
> things like creating an initrd, etc.  Maybe someone could post a
> kernel.spec file for the latest version of SuSE.  I can look at it and
> see how it differs from what I'm doing on Fedora.

You don't want to see it. In case so insist:

http://www.rts.uni-hannover.de/rtaddon/rpms/src/unpacked/kernel-xeno-default.spec

> 
> Right now, my spec file also creates a HUGE kernel-source RPM that
> contains the whole compiled source tree.  I really need to understand
> how the Fedora spec file creates kernel-devel RPMs that have just the
> stuff needed for compiling kernel modules.  This would be a lot better
> than having the huge kernel-source RPM that I generate now.

No clue either here (given the SuSE file...).

> 
>> This would help us to provide, e.g., an i386 pre-built package with
>> reasonable default config, something I still consider useful. But, of
>> course, it must not cost any effort :). Automated rpm generation would
>> be a big step in that direction.
> 
> I think that would be very useful to many folks.
> 
>> BTW, have you seen my Xenomai.spec for the SuSE packages I once posted?
>> Attached is an updated version. It splits the Xenomai userland in
>> several sub-packages to allow selective installation.
> 
> No, I hadn't looked at it.  That is probably a better approach.  I can
> test this on Fedora when I get a chance.

You're welcome. The userspace part should be simpler to make generic.

Jan


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 250 bytes --]