[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK7LNASCmZyS11WkUWXLXVWgk-WU5JV=MMw=S6pXAzMhkVJ40Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 09:43:04 +0900
From: Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>
To: Cedric Hombourger <Cedric_Hombourger@...tor.com>
Cc: isar-users@...glegroups.com,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Linux Kbuild mailing list <linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
Riku Voipio <riku.voipio@...aro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] builddeb: generate multi-arch friendly linux-libc-dev package
CCed a couple of people.
On Mon, Jun 17, 2019 at 3:15 PM Cedric Hombourger
<Cedric_Hombourger@...tor.com> wrote:
>
> Debian-based distributions place libc header files in a machine
> specific directory (/usr/include/<libc-machine>) instead of
> /usr/include/asm to support installation of the linux-libc-dev
> package from multiple architectures. Move headers installed by
> "make headers_install" accordingly.
>
> Signed-off-by: Cedric Hombourger <Cedric_Hombourger@...tor.com>
> Reviewed-by: Henning Schild <henning.schild@...mens.com>
> ---
> scripts/package/builddeb | 5 +++++
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/scripts/package/builddeb b/scripts/package/builddeb
> index b03dd56a4782..8f7afb3a84e9 100755
> --- a/scripts/package/builddeb
> +++ b/scripts/package/builddeb
> @@ -132,6 +132,11 @@ fi
> if [ "$ARCH" != "um" ]; then
> $MAKE -f $srctree/Makefile headers_check
> $MAKE -f $srctree/Makefile headers_install INSTALL_HDR_PATH="$libc_headers_dir/usr"
> + # move asm headers to /usr/include/<libc-machine>/asm to match the structure
> + # used by Debian-based distros (to support multi-arch)
> + libc_mach=$($CC -dumpmachine)
> + mkdir $libc_headers_dir/usr/include/$libc_mach
> + mv $libc_headers_dir/usr/include/asm $libc_headers_dir/usr/include/$libc_mach/
> fi
>
> # Install the maintainer scripts
I am not sure but,
I just worried about the backward compatibility...
Was this previously broken?
I guess debian is using own control file
instead of the one in upstream kernel.
So, this is almost a matter for developers, I think.
How did debian-base distros managed this before,
and will this introduce no breakage?
Ben,
Could you comment on this?
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada
Powered by blists - more mailing lists