NetBSD-Bugs archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: port-shark/41672: Install kernel in release directory is ELF version only.

The following reply was made to PR port-shark/41672; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Soren Jacobsen <>
Cc:,, Izumi 
Subject: Re: port-shark/41672: Install kernel in release directory is ELF
 version only.
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 10:30:52 -0800

 On Aug 23, 2009, at 9:50 AM, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:
 >>     release/shark/binary/kernel contains ELF and a.out versions of
 >>     GENERIC, but only an ELF version of the INSTALL kernel.
 > It seems put in shark/installation/instkernel,
 > but the following patch should handle it more properly:
 I don't see why having the kernel in shark/installation/instkernel/ is  
 not proper.  Other ports have used instkernel for a long time, and so  
 has shark.  I didn't check how long the kernel has been in instkernel,  
 but it has been documented in the INSTALL notes for over 7 years.  So  
 with the change that is@ made, shark/installation/ is empty and the  
 INSTALL notes are now wrong.
 To me, the real bug is that shark/binary/kernel/netbsd-INSTALL* exists  
 in the first place.  In the case of shark, where the firmware can boot  
 a kernel directly, installation/ seems the right location for an  
 INSTALL kernel.  The INSTALL kernel _is_ the installation media, and  
 if I were naively looking for installation media, I'd look in the  
 installation directory.  If I were following documentation, I'd also  
 look there ;)
 I'm mildly opposed to the change that was committed, since the problem  
 described in this PR ("there's no a.out INSTALL kernel") didn't  
 actually exist.  I do agree that having an ELF version of INSTALL is  
 confusing, but as noted elsewhere in this PR, it doesn't seem there's  
 any need for an ELF version of the INSTALL kernel anyway.
 I think the best thing to do would be to revert the changes and then  
 not place the ELF version of netbsd-INSTALL in shark/binary/kernel/.
 It's also quite clear that there's a lot of variation in how various  
 ports are organized.  That said, I think that instkernel is a good  
 location for installation kernels on ports where the kernel can be  
 loaded directly, and if anything is to be done about smoothing out the  
 inconsistencies between ports, it should be in the direction of  
 instkernel, not away from it.
 Anyway, I guess I'll shut up if someone updates the INSTALL notes, but  
 I will note that if instkernel is to be banished (and, as I've said, I  
 don't think it should be), then alpha, evbarm, and mac68k should be  
 changed as well.  Don't forget the other misfits like acorn26,  
 acorn32, evbmips, hpcarm, hpcmips, hpcsh, and ofppc.  There may be  
 some others that I missed, I only took a quick glance.

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index