On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 09:53 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 05:03 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 08:38 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 15:59 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > > The '686-bigmem' flavour will be renamed to '686-pae'; support both names.
> > > > The '686' flavour will be removed, but we can still offer it if available.
> > >
> > > Do you also have patches for d-i's kernel-wedge and the main installer
> > > build?
> >
> > No, I'm not familiar with those. I did the kernel installation
> > selection myself because I've worked on it before.
> >
> > > Also debian-cd will need changes too. Since the latter two are
> > > mainly due to Xen support I can take care of that if you like, although
> > > I think it will depend on the kernel actually being uploaded since I
> > > can't see an easy way to support both names in the main installer build.
> >
> > So it depends on when the d-i team decides to switch to 2.6.39 (or
> > later). But you can get your patches ready before then.
>
> Correct. I'll look into it.

While I was hacking up an updated kernel-wedge/linux-kernel-di-i386-2.6
to use 2.6.39 to test this I noticed that nls_base is now built in
instead of modular, despite CONFIG_NLS=m under debian/config. This is
because various =y options (e.g. CONFIG_PCI_LABEL, CONFIG_JOLIET) now
appear to select NLS...

Probably not a big deal, nls_base.o is ~5k, but thought I'd mention it.

It just means that the nls-core-modules udeb goes away.

Ian.
--
Ian Campbell
Current Noise: Napalm Death - De-evolution Ad Nauseum

I couldn't possibly fail to disagree with you less.


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-kernel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Archive: 1304685363.26692.155.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com" >http://lists.debian.org/1304685363.26692.155.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com

On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:36 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 09:53 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 05:03 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 08:38 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 15:59 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > > > The '686-bigmem' flavour will be renamed to '686-pae'; support both names.
> > > > > The '686' flavour will be removed, but we can still offer it if available.
> > > >
> > > > Do you also have patches for d-i's kernel-wedge and the main installer
> > > > build?
> > >
> > > No, I'm not familiar with those. I did the kernel installation
> > > selection myself because I've worked on it before.
> > >
> > > > Also debian-cd will need changes too. Since the latter two are
> > > > mainly due to Xen support I can take care of that if you like, although
> > > > I think it will depend on the kernel actually being uploaded since I
> > > > can't see an easy way to support both names in the main installer build.
> > >
> > > So it depends on when the d-i team decides to switch to 2.6.39 (or
> > > later). But you can get your patches ready before then.
> >
> > Correct. I'll look into it.
>
> While I was hacking up an updated kernel-wedge/linux-kernel-di-i386-2.6
> to use 2.6.39 to test this I noticed that nls_base is now built in
> instead of modular, despite CONFIG_NLS=m under debian/config. This is
> because various =y options (e.g. CONFIG_PCI_LABEL, CONFIG_JOLIET) now
> appear to select NLS...

JOLIET has selected NLS since the beginning of git history (covering 3
Debian releases so far), though it shouldn't. Given how many things
require NLS, though, we may as well explicitly make it built-in.

> Probably not a big deal, nls_base.o is ~5k, but thought I'd mention it.
>
> It just means that the nls-core-modules udeb goes away.

OK.

Ben.

--
Ben Hutchings
Once a job is fouled up, anything done to improve it makes it worse.

On Tue, 2011-05-10 at 03:58 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-05-06 at 13:36 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 09:53 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 05:03 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2011-04-28 at 08:38 +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> > > > > On Sun, 2011-04-24 at 15:59 +0100, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > > > > > The '686-bigmem' flavour will be renamed to '686-pae'; support both names.
> > > > > > The '686' flavour will be removed, but we can still offer it if available.
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you also have patches for d-i's kernel-wedge and the main installer
> > > > > build?
> > > >
> > > > No, I'm not familiar with those. I did the kernel installation
> > > > selection myself because I've worked on it before.
> > > >
> > > > > Also debian-cd will need changes too. Since the latter two are
> > > > > mainly due to Xen support I can take care of that if you like, although
> > > > > I think it will depend on the kernel actually being uploaded since I
> > > > > can't see an easy way to support both names in the main installer build.
> > > >
> > > > So it depends on when the d-i team decides to switch to 2.6.39 (or
> > > > later). But you can get your patches ready before then.
> > >
> > > Correct. I'll look into it.
> >
> > While I was hacking up an updated kernel-wedge/linux-kernel-di-i386-2.6
> > to use 2.6.39 to test this I noticed that nls_base is now built in
> > instead of modular, despite CONFIG_NLS=m under debian/config. This is
> > because various =y options (e.g. CONFIG_PCI_LABEL, CONFIG_JOLIET) now
> > appear to select NLS...
>
> JOLIET has selected NLS since the beginning of git history (covering 3
> Debian releases so far), though it shouldn't.

It's a module anyhow or rather it is a boolean hidden behind ISO9660_FS
which is tristate=m so I think its select turns into a >=m not a y.

CONFIG_PCI_LABEL seems to be the actual culprit and it is a hidden
boolean so there's no real choice, other than disabling DMI and ACPI
which is obviously a non-starter.

> Given how many things require NLS, though, we may as well explicitly make it built-in.

ACK, I see you have made this change, thanks!

Ian.
--
Ian Campbell

I am currently transitioning to a new OpenPGP key, please see:
http://www.hellion.org.uk/key-transition-2011-04-27-2F6BCD59-to-79074FA8.txt

BOFH excuse #159:

Stubborn processes