[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 <snj%pobox.com@localhost>
Cc: netbsd-bugs%netbsd.org@localhost, is%beverly.kleinbus.org@localhost, Izumi
Subject: Re: port-shark/41672: Install kernel in release directory is ELF
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.
Main Index |
Thread Index |