2000-11-22 15:50:52

by 64738

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: LKCD from SGI

Hi.

I tried to find some information on whether the Linux Kernel Crash Dumps
patches are going into 2.4 (or 2.5). Has there been any decision?


2000-11-22 18:39:35

by Matt D. Robinson

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: LKCD from SGI

64738 wrote:
>
> Hi.
>
> I tried to find some information on whether the Linux Kernel Crash Dumps
> patches are going into 2.4 (or 2.5). Has there been any decision?

LKCD won't go into 2.4 (or 2.5) until I finish writing the direct
disk open/write functions that avoid going through the standard
IDE and SCSI drivers. I'm working on it.

As far as work for 2.4 goes, we've got a version on SourceForge that
works well (for i386 and 95% for ia64).

As soon as the drivers are done, we'll hopefully get acceptance.

--Matt

P.S. Any way we can standardize 'make install' in the kernel? It's
disturbing to have different install mechanisms per platform ...
I can make the changes for a few platforms.

2000-11-23 02:12:19

by Peter Samuelson

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: LKCD from SGI


[Matt D. Robinson]
> Any way we can standardize 'make install' in the kernel? It's
> disturbing to have different install mechanisms per platform ...
> I can make the changes for a few platforms.

2.5 material, already on the todo list.

Peter

2000-11-25 00:48:18

by Eric W. Beiderman

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: LKCD from SGI

Peter Samuelson <[email protected]> writes:

> [Matt D. Robinson]
> > Any way we can standardize 'make install' in the kernel? It's
> > disturbing to have different install mechanisms per platform ...
> > I can make the changes for a few platforms.
>
> 2.5 material, already on the todo list.

What is the thought on this. There is an issue with different
boot loaders needing rather dramatically different formats...

Eric

2000-11-25 02:29:15

by Keith Owens

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: LKCD from SGI

On 24 Nov 2000 16:40:50 -0700,
[email protected] (Eric W. Biederman) wrote:
>Peter Samuelson <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> [Matt D. Robinson]
>> > Any way we can standardize 'make install' in the kernel? It's
>> > disturbing to have different install mechanisms per platform ...
>> > I can make the changes for a few platforms.
>>
>> 2.5 material, already on the todo list.
>
>What is the thought on this. There is an issue with different
>boot loaders needing rather dramatically different formats...

2.5 kernel build wish list[1] has a couple of entries for standardising
the install targets. My thinking (and I know that some people disagree
with this) is that the standard targets of a linux compile are only

* vmlinux
* System.map
* modules in the kernel tree (not installed yet)
* any other bits and pieces that are required to compile external
modules against this config.

The install phases are many and varied, depending on whether you are
installing on this machine, on another machine, does your boot loader
understand ELF, do you have to do the [b]zImage fiddling first, are you
doing a network boot from ROM, a network boot over tftp etc.

In current kernels the install phases are mixed in with the compile
phase which makes it difficult to handle different install targets.
2.5 will have a default make target which does the compile phase but
does nothing that is install related, i.e. default is no [b]zImage, no
modules_install etc. There will be separate install targets for any
combination that is required and for which people can be bothered
writing the make scripts.

[1] ftp://ftp.<country>.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/kbuild/makefile-wishlist-2.5-...

2000-11-25 13:49:04

by J.A. Magallon

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: LKCD from SGI


On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 02:58:37 Keith Owens wrote:
>
> 2.5 kernel build wish list[1] has a couple of entries for standardising
> the install targets. My thinking (and I know that some people disagree
> with this) is that the standard targets of a linux compile are only
>
> * vmlinux
> * System.map
> * modules in the kernel tree (not installed yet)
> * any other bits and pieces that are required to compile external
> modules against this config.
>

Could the default target install names int the std kernel be changed to
System.map -> System.map-$(KERNELRELEASE)
vmlinuz -> vmlinuz-$(KERNELRELEASE)
and then symlink to that ?

I think everyone that has a stable2.2, a devel 2.2 and a test24 is using that
method, so as many distros...

--
Juan Antonio Magallon Lacarta #> cd /pub
mailto:[email protected] #> more beer

Linux 2.2.18-pre23-vm #3 SMP Wed Nov 22 22:33:53 CET 2000 i686 unknown

2000-11-25 13:54:34

by Keith Owens

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: LKCD from SGI

On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 14:18:30 +0100,
"J . A . Magallon" <[email protected]> wrote:
>On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 02:58:37 Keith Owens wrote:
>> 2.5 kernel build wish list[1] has a couple of entries for standardising
>> the install targets. My thinking (and I know that some people disagree
>> with this) is that the standard targets of a linux compile are only
>>
>> * vmlinux
>> * System.map
>> * modules in the kernel tree (not installed yet)
>> * any other bits and pieces that are required to compile external
>> modules against this config.
>
>Could the default target install names int the std kernel be changed to
>System.map -> System.map-$(KERNELRELEASE)
>vmlinuz -> vmlinuz-$(KERNELRELEASE)
>and then symlink to that ?

We could do a lot of things in the install targets. But none of them
are going to be done before kernel 2.5. We are in code freeze (is this
freeze number 4 or 5?). Changing the install method just before a new
kernel branch is released will not be popular with the distributors.

2000-11-25 14:15:40

by Matthew Kirkwood

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: LKCD from SGI

On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, J . A . Magallon wrote:

> Could the default target install names int the std kernel be changed to
> System.map -> System.map-$(KERNELRELEASE)
> vmlinuz -> vmlinuz-$(KERNELRELEASE)
> and then symlink to that ?
>
> I think everyone that has a stable2.2, a devel 2.2 and a test24 is
> using that method, so as many distros...

The /sbin/installkernel hooks allow you to do this (and
other stuff) very easily:

# make install

does it all for you on Red Hat. I've attached their
/sbin/installkernel in case you want to see how its
done.

Matthew.


Attachments:
installkernel (758.00 B)

2000-11-25 14:19:51

by J.A. Magallon

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: LKCD from SGI


On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 14:23:57 Keith Owens wrote:
> On Sat, 25 Nov 2000 14:18:30 +0100,
> "J . A . Magallon" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >Could the default target install names int the std kernel be changed to
> >System.map -> System.map-$(KERNELRELEASE)
> >vmlinuz -> vmlinuz-$(KERNELRELEASE)
> >and then symlink to that ?
>
> We could do a lot of things in the install targets. But none of them
> are going to be done before kernel 2.5. We are in code freeze (is this
> freeze number 4 or 5?). Changing the install method just before a new
> kernel branch is released will not be popular with the distributors.

Yes, I know. I thought you were talking about '2.5 kernel build wish list'.

--
Juan Antonio Magallon Lacarta #> cd /pub
mailto:[email protected] #> more beer

Linux 2.2.18-pre23-vm #3 SMP Wed Nov 22 22:33:53 CET 2000 i686 unknown

2000-11-25 15:48:20

by 64738

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: LKCD from SGI

Hello,

in the last time I got several e-mails from you, but that must be a mistake
because I do not know you and I don?t know why you send me these e-mails.
Please check whether you have the address [email protected] in your
address-book. Please delete this address!! In past you have put this address in
the field: copy and blind-copy.

Thank you very much!

Jan Woschinski
Schwung (University of Mannheim)