Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 74056
Kernel documentation ignores packaging system.
Last modified: 2007-04-18 12:46:42 EDT
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Konqueror/3; Linux)
Description of problem:
The readme in the Linux kernel source does not tell users how to build a
packaged kernel. Likewise, the make menuconfig tool also recommends that
users run `make dep' themselves after creating their config file rather than
`make rpm' (which would run `make dep' itself).
By installing unpackaged applications, users install files to their hard disk
which cannot be properly uninstalled, verified, queried, or upgraded using
standard LSB mechanisms. As many other applications rely on having a specific
version of the kernel installed, they must either be force installed, which
further breaks the system.
It is true that many other apps author documentation is also unaware of rpm.
However, that does not mean this is not a problem, and fixing the kernel
documentation is a good place to start, as this is one of the most frequently
rebuilt sources on a Linux system, and would thus go a long way towards
promoting proper system administration proceedures.
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Steps to Reproduce:
2b) Run make menuconfig and notice the message on stdout.
2c) The various other config targets may also exhibit similar behavior.
Expected Results: The kernel documentation should contain instructions for
building standard Linux packages of the kernel.
make menuconfig, and any other config tool, should tell the users to then
`make rpm' as their next step.
We package the Linux kernel documentation as is. The kernel-source package is
meant for code that needs our kernel source tree to build against, not for
rebuilding the kernel
Rebuilding the kernel is done like every other package (rpm --install
something.src.rpm; rpmbuild -ba SPECS/something.spec)
Thanks for your response Alan. This differs from Red Hat's Customization guide,
which suggests users use the kernel-source package for building custom kernels.
* Should the Customization guide be modifed to reflect the method suggested by
* If the method used in the customization guide is indeed correct, can the
kernel suggest users create a packaged kernel rather than an unpackaged one?
* Can this be reopened?