linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Fixup deb-pkg target to generate separate firmware deb.

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 13 Sep 2008 18:28:53 +0200
From:	Frans Pop <elendil@...net.nl>
To:	Jonathan McDowell <noodles@...th.li>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Fixup deb-pkg target to generate separate firmware deb.

On Saturday 13 September 2008, Jonathan McDowell wrote:
> Ta, I've fixed both the indents. I've also changed the firmware package
> to be arch: all.

Although I agree that arch all is technically not incorrect, I wonder if 
it is the smart thing to do it here.

The pkg-deb target is probably mostly, or even exclusively - used to build 
custom kernels, and people might be crossbuilding kernels with different 
configs and thus resulting in different firmware files from the same 
source (thus same version) on the same system.
I build amd64, i386 and armel that way on my main desktop system, all with 
different configs (tuned mainly to keep the build time down).

Keeping the firmware package arch-specific would ensure that a firmware 
package built with the config for one arch does not get overwritten by 
one built for another arch with a different config.

Cheers,
FJP
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/