FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Ubuntu > Ubuntu Kernel Team

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 11-28-2008, 09:30 AM
Stefan Bader
 
Default apt-get source linux-restricted modules

This was briefly discussed/encountered this morning and after some thoughts on
it I am not completely sure this is really a bug or just the odd way things are
supposed to happen.
The thing probably most starters (me too) stumble over is, if they try to build
or modify the lrm package (the same would happen with lum+lbm but since we
start from git trees there it does not show up as with lrm) the first thing to
try is: apt-get source linux-restircted-modules. However this will result in
the linux-meta source to be fetched. The same happens with
linux-restricted-modules-generic. This is confusing but probably the very right
thing, given that both are names of meta-packages and the source package for
those _is_ linux-meta. The real package is linux-restricted-modules-$(uname -r)
for the current running kernel and this correctly fetches the right source.

The question now is: can or should this be changed or is there no way around it
but has just to be clearly documented on the wiki. Is the source package of a
meta-package the source it was build from or the source it resolves to?

Stefan

--

When all other means of communication fail, try words!



--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 11-28-2008, 09:48 AM
Colin Watson
 
Default apt-get source linux-restricted modules

On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:30:30AM +0100, Stefan Bader wrote:
> This was briefly discussed/encountered this morning and after some thoughts
> on it I am not completely sure this is really a bug or just the odd way
> things are supposed to happen.
> The thing probably most starters (me too) stumble over is, if they try to
> build or modify the lrm package (the same would happen with lum+lbm but
> since we start from git trees there it does not show up as with lrm) the
> first thing to try is: apt-get source linux-restircted-modules. However
> this will result in the linux-meta source to be fetched. The same happens
> with linux-restricted-modules-generic. This is confusing but probably the
> very right thing, given that both are names of meta-packages and the source
> package for those _is_ linux-meta. The real package is
> linux-restricted-modules-$(uname -r) for the current running kernel and
> this correctly fetches the right source.
>
> The question now is: can or should this be changed or is there no way
> around it but has just to be clearly documented on the wiki. Is the source
> package of a meta-package the source it was build from or the source it
> resolves to?

Metapackages aren't magic at this level. There is absolutely nothing
special to metapackages (as such; i.e. packages that have no significant
content themselves, but exist purely for their dependencies) going on
here.

The only thing that's odd here is that there's a 'linux' source package
that produces a bunch of binaries (not including 'linux'), a
'linux-restricted-modules' source package that produces another bunch of
binaries (not including 'linux-restricted-modules'), and a 'linux-meta'
source package that produces a bunch of binaries (including 'linux' and
'linux-restricted-modules'). Thus there is an ambiguity: it is not clear
whether you wanted the source for the binary package 'linux' or the
source package 'linux'.

I did say on IRC that this was a bug, but on a little further
investigation I find that it's configurable. apt-get(8) says:

--only-source
Only has meaning for the source and build-dep commands.
Indicates that the given source names are not to be mapped
through the binary table. This means that if this option is
specified, these commands will only accept source package
names as arguments, rather than accepting binary package
names and looking up the corresponding source package.
Configuration Item: APT::Get::Only-Source.

In other words, 'apt-get --only-source source linux-restricted-modules'
means "no, really the source package linux-restricted-modules, not
whatever source package produces the linux-restricted-modules binary". I
think if I had been writing this code I'd have made it the default, but
given that it's a configuration option I'm not sure that it's worth
causing confusion by changing the default. It probably makes sense to
just document --only-source for the kernel team.

Cheers,

--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@ubuntu.com]

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 11-28-2008, 10:01 AM
Stefan Bader
 
Default apt-get source linux-restricted modules

Colin Watson wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 11:30:30AM +0100, Stefan Bader wrote:
>> This was briefly discussed/encountered this morning and after some thoughts
>> on it I am not completely sure this is really a bug or just the odd way
>> things are supposed to happen.
>> The thing probably most starters (me too) stumble over is, if they try to
>> build or modify the lrm package (the same would happen with lum+lbm but
>> since we start from git trees there it does not show up as with lrm) the
>> first thing to try is: apt-get source linux-restircted-modules. However
>> this will result in the linux-meta source to be fetched. The same happens
>> with linux-restricted-modules-generic. This is confusing but probably the
>> very right thing, given that both are names of meta-packages and the source
>> package for those _is_ linux-meta. The real package is
>> linux-restricted-modules-$(uname -r) for the current running kernel and
>> this correctly fetches the right source.
>>
>> The question now is: can or should this be changed or is there no way
>> around it but has just to be clearly documented on the wiki. Is the source
>> package of a meta-package the source it was build from or the source it
>> resolves to?
>
> Metapackages aren't magic at this level. There is absolutely nothing
> special to metapackages (as such; i.e. packages that have no significant
> content themselves, but exist purely for their dependencies) going on
> here.
>
> The only thing that's odd here is that there's a 'linux' source package
> that produces a bunch of binaries (not including 'linux'), a
> 'linux-restricted-modules' source package that produces another bunch of
> binaries (not including 'linux-restricted-modules'), and a 'linux-meta'
> source package that produces a bunch of binaries (including 'linux' and
> 'linux-restricted-modules'). Thus there is an ambiguity: it is not clear
> whether you wanted the source for the binary package 'linux' or the
> source package 'linux'.
>
> I did say on IRC that this was a bug, but on a little further
> investigation I find that it's configurable. apt-get(8) says:
>
> --only-source
> Only has meaning for the source and build-dep commands.
> Indicates that the given source names are not to be mapped
> through the binary table. This means that if this option is
> specified, these commands will only accept source package
> names as arguments, rather than accepting binary package
> names and looking up the corresponding source package.
> Configuration Item: APT::Get::Only-Source.
>
> In other words, 'apt-get --only-source source linux-restricted-modules'

In our special case (and I do not know the roots of this) the name of the
source package is linux-restricted-modules-<kernel-version> (e.g. 2.6.24).
To me this looks a bit like some probably historic thing, since the source
package for the kernel is linux and produces the versioned kernel packages. But
then, this might be a strange way from the packaging point of view.

Stefan

> means "no, really the source package linux-restricted-modules, not
> whatever source package produces the linux-restricted-modules binary". I
> think if I had been writing this code I'd have made it the default, but
> given that it's a configuration option I'm not sure that it's worth
> causing confusion by changing the default. It probably makes sense to
> just document --only-source for the kernel team.
>
> Cheers,
>


--

When all other means of communication fail, try words!



--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 
Old 11-28-2008, 10:08 AM
Colin Watson
 
Default apt-get source linux-restricted modules

On Fri, Nov 28, 2008 at 12:01:52PM +0100, Stefan Bader wrote:
> Colin Watson wrote:
> >In other words, 'apt-get --only-source source linux-restricted-modules'
>
> In our special case (and I do not know the roots of this) the name of the
> source package is linux-restricted-modules-<kernel-version> (e.g. 2.6.24).
> To me this looks a bit like some probably historic thing, since the source
> package for the kernel is linux and produces the versioned kernel packages.
> But then, this might be a strange way from the packaging point of view.

Well, obviously replace the source package name I used in my example
with whichever one is appropriate. You're correct that it was that way
in hardy and earlier, but since intrepid the source package name has
been linux-restricted-modules.

--
Colin Watson [cjwatson@ubuntu.com]

--
kernel-team mailing list
kernel-team@lists.ubuntu.com
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:45 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org