Re: [gentoo-dev] kernel-mod.eclass addition + clean up

[Daniel Drake]

Hi,

On Monday 01 November 2004 01:57, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> I've moved most of the current support functions from kernel-mod.eclass
> to kernel-info.eclass and added functions for calling depmod and
> functions for substituting SUBDIR= with M= to kernel-mod.eclass.

(not all of these points are related to your changes, but it would be nice to 
get them ironed out while we are working on it)

I'm not too sure about kernel-mod_src_compile. There isn't a generic argument 
(e.g. KERNEL_DIR) which makefiles tend to follow when specifying the kernel 
source. If anything we should go for a hackish way at trying to support as 
many builds as possible, e.g. setting KDIR, KERNDIR, KERNEL_DIR, KERNEL, 
KERNEL_SRC, .., to /usr/src/linux and O, M, OUTPUT, SYSOUT, to ${S} .. but 
that may well break some builds. I think we should leave this out altogether.

kernel-mod_subdir_to_m requires some extra thought, its not always a simple 
search and replace. (e.g. autotooled Makefiles often use an internal SUBDIRS 
variable if I remember right). In most cases this would be useful, but there 
are always some oddities.

kernel-info_getversion - is this needed? portage.py provides the variable $KV 
which should give the same info. I think we should only keep one or the 
other. If we keep kernel-info_getversion then it needs to be extended to read 
2.6.9's new LOCALVERSION stuff (the internal portage version has been updated 
in CVS).

kernel-info_configoption* - yes, I know I wrote these, but I think we should 
change the .config checking a bit:
	[ -e "${KERNEL_DIR}/.config" ] || die "Kernel has not been configured yet"
Instead of the above, we should perhaps create another function and use it to 
print out a more informative error message if no .config file has been found.

Other than that, I like the proposed split. Thanks!

Daniel

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list