[arch-dev-public] [signoff] linux-api-headers-2.6.32.5-1
linux-api-headers-2.6.32.5-1 - rename kernel-headers - too similar to kernel26-headers (FS#17655) - convert to arch=any (built on x86_64, tested on i686) - delete useless install files (FS#17641) - bump to latest patch-set Diffing the package shows that updating the patch-set does not require a toolchain rebuild. Signoff, Allan
On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 12:13 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
linux-api-headers-2.6.32.5-1 - rename kernel-headers - too similar to kernel26-headers (FS#17655) - convert to arch=any (built on x86_64, tested on i686) - delete useless install files (FS#17641) - bump to latest patch-set
Diffing the package shows that updating the patch-set does not require a toolchain rebuild.
Works fine here, but one sidenote. These headers are architecture-dependent. For i686/x86_64 there's no problem, as both share the same architecture in the kernel tree, but installing this on PPC will make compiling packages impossible.
On 25/01/10 17:41, Jan de Groot wrote:
On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 12:13 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
linux-api-headers-2.6.32.5-1 - rename kernel-headers - too similar to kernel26-headers (FS#17655) - convert to arch=any (built on x86_64, tested on i686) - delete useless install files (FS#17641) - bump to latest patch-set
Diffing the package shows that updating the patch-set does not require a toolchain rebuild.
Works fine here, but one sidenote. These headers are architecture-dependent. For i686/x86_64 there's no problem, as both share the same architecture in the kernel tree, but installing this on PPC will make compiling packages impossible.
Good point. I had thought about this and decided that they we architecture independent on the architectures we support so went with arch=any. Should I revert that? Allan
On Mon, Jan 25, 2010 at 1:46 AM, Allan McRae <allan@archlinux.org> wrote:
On 25/01/10 17:41, Jan de Groot wrote:
On Sun, 2010-01-24 at 12:13 +1000, Allan McRae wrote:
linux-api-headers-2.6.32.5-1 - rename kernel-headers - too similar to kernel26-headers (FS#17655) - convert to arch=any (built on x86_64, tested on i686) - delete useless install files (FS#17641) - bump to latest patch-set
Diffing the package shows that updating the patch-set does not require a toolchain rebuild.
Works fine here, but one sidenote. These headers are architecture-dependent. For i686/x86_64 there's no problem, as both share the same architecture in the kernel tree, but installing this on PPC will make compiling packages impossible.
Good point. I had thought about this and decided that they we architecture independent on the architectures we support so went with arch=any. Should I revert that?
A comment in the PKGBUILD would probably be nice even if you don't revert it alluding to the above. That way anyone trying to do some abs cross-compile could at least have something to go off of. However, with that logic, making it not arch-independent would help them even more... -Dan
participants (3)
-
Allan McRae
-
Dan McGee
-
Jan de Groot