On some architectures, such as arm64, KBUILD_IMAGE is not a full path
but instead just the build target. The builddeb script handles this
case correctly today and will try arch/$ARCH/boot/$KBUILD_IMAGE so we
can just borrow that logic and adapt it slightly for spec file syntax.
Cc: Michal Marek <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <[email protected]>
---
It is currently a mixed-bag on if architectures will use a build target
(arm, arm64, arc are certainly by inspection and a few others 'may') or
a full path (x86, blackfin, s390). Given that builddeb gets this case
correct, I think changing mkspec is the right way to go here.
---
scripts/package/mkspec | 6 +++++-
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/scripts/package/mkspec b/scripts/package/mkspec
index bb43f153fd8e..aa5f3db43f12 100755
--- a/scripts/package/mkspec
+++ b/scripts/package/mkspec
@@ -101,7 +101,11 @@ echo "%ifarch ppc64"
echo "cp vmlinux arch/powerpc/boot"
echo "cp arch/powerpc/boot/"'$KBUILD_IMAGE $RPM_BUILD_ROOT'"/boot/vmlinuz-$KERNELRELEASE"
echo "%else"
-echo 'cp $KBUILD_IMAGE $RPM_BUILD_ROOT'"/boot/vmlinuz-$KERNELRELEASE"
+echo "if [ -e $KBUILD_IMAGE ]; then"
+echo ' cp $KBUILD_IMAGE $RPM_BUILD_ROOT'"/boot/vmlinuz-$KERNELRELEASE"
+echo "else"
+echo ' cp arch/$ARCH/boot/$KBUILD_IMAGE $RPM_BUILD_ROOT'"/boot/vmlinuz-$KERNELRELEASE"
+echo "fi"
echo "%endif"
echo "%endif"
--
2.7.4
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 11:59:22PM +0000, Tom Rini wrote:
> On some architectures, such as arm64, KBUILD_IMAGE is not a full path
> but instead just the build target. The builddeb script handles this
> case correctly today and will try arch/$ARCH/boot/$KBUILD_IMAGE so we
> can just borrow that logic and adapt it slightly for spec file syntax.
>
> Cc: Michal Marek <[email protected]>
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: [email protected]
> Cc: Catalin Marinas <[email protected]>
> Cc: Will Deacon <[email protected]>
> Signed-off-by: Tom Rini <[email protected]>
> ---
> It is currently a mixed-bag on if architectures will use a build target
> (arm, arm64, arc are certainly by inspection and a few others 'may') or
> a full path (x86, blackfin, s390). Given that builddeb gets this case
> correct, I think changing mkspec is the right way to go here.
I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that
it was brought up again just before I sent my patch. I just want to
point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will
still not have a functional rpm build target. This is at least probably
important for arm. Of course all of those could also be addressed with
a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure
everything gets fixed one way or another. Thanks!
--
Tom
Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a):
> I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that
> it was brought up again just before I sent my patch. I just want to
> point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will
> still not have a functional rpm build target. This is at least probably
> important for arm. Of course all of those could also be addressed with
> a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure
> everything gets fixed one way or another. Thanks!
The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but
patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for
instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750.
Michal
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:03:44PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote:
> Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a):
> > I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that
> > it was brought up again just before I sent my patch. I just want to
> > point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will
> > still not have a functional rpm build target. This is at least probably
> > important for arm. Of course all of those could also be addressed with
> > a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure
> > everything gets fixed one way or another. Thanks!
>
> The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but
> patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for
> instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750.
Ah, OK, thanks. I'll just hope it gets in soon, I like being able to
easily drop new kernels in on my arm64 box :)
--
Tom
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:37:55AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:03:44PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote:
> > Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a):
> > > I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that
> > > it was brought up again just before I sent my patch. I just want to
> > > point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will
> > > still not have a functional rpm build target. This is at least probably
> > > important for arm. Of course all of those could also be addressed with
> > > a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure
> > > everything gets fixed one way or another. Thanks!
> >
> > The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but
> > patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for
> > instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750.
>
> Ah, OK, thanks. I'll just hope it gets in soon, I like being able to
> easily drop new kernels in on my arm64 box :)
I'll pick up the arm64 patch this week (I was on holiday last week).
Will
2017-03-20 19:13 GMT+09:00 Will Deacon <[email protected]>:
> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:37:55AM -0400, Tom Rini wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 04:03:44PM +0100, Michal Marek wrote:
>> > Dne 15.3.2017 v 15:51 Tom Rini napsal(a):
>> > > I found https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9442211/ today and I see that
>> > > it was brought up again just before I sent my patch. I just want to
>> > > point out that 9442211 doesn't address arm, arc, and sh and they will
>> > > still not have a functional rpm build target. This is at least probably
>> > > important for arm. Of course all of those could also be addressed with
>> > > a patch similar to 9442211, and my main concern is making sure
>> > > everything gets fixed one way or another. Thanks!
>> >
>> > The patch is 1/6 of a series that also covers other architectures, but
>> > patchwork won't should you the rest of the thread. Have a look here for
>> > instance: https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/11/22/750.
>>
>> Ah, OK, thanks. I'll just hope it gets in soon, I like being able to
>> easily drop new kernels in on my arm64 box :)
>
> I'll pick up the arm64 patch this week (I was on holiday last week).
>
> Will
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kbuild" in
> the body of a message to [email protected]
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
The patch 9442211 has been applied to linux-kbuild/misc
(Will acked to do so.)
--
Best Regards
Masahiro Yamada