[07:40] Mithrandir: there is very little point in adding modules to kernel-wedge. [07:40] if you need to ship modules, you need to do it directly from the kernel. [07:40] we removed the "lists" dependencies between kernel and kernel-wedge [09:34] fabbione: how do I do that? I didn't see a way. [09:35] Mithrandir: debian/d-i/ [09:36] there is shared/ that has the same meaning as adding a module to kernel-wedge [09:36] the trick is in what you include in the unionfs-modules per arch [09:36] instead of [09:36] that would be "shared/unionfs" [09:37] but if unionfs udebs are required, just remind me on monday [09:37] i need to unfuck the baz repo first [09:37] and open proper devel branch first [09:37] I did that, but kernel-wedge gen-control didn't output anything about unionfs-modukes [09:37] modules, even [09:37] Mithrandir: you still need to tell that you want the module in a per arch specific way [09:38] and note that kernel-wedge is stupid [09:38] yes, but gen-control needs to have a description and so on, that seems to go into kernel-wedge. [09:38] if you check the debian/rules, you will see that we copy the info in another dir to make them available to kernel-wedge [09:38] Mithrandir: you can always override it locally [09:38] how? [09:39] anyway did you commit anything about this into baz? [09:39] not yet [09:39] if so in which branch?? [09:39] ojk [09:39] ok [09:39] overriding where modules goes (per arch) is easy, but you can't _add_ modules without touching kernel-wedge, or at least it seems that way to me. [09:39] Mithrandir: debian/d-i/$arch/package-list iirc or very similar [09:40] Mithrandir: nah.. we override all the lists of modules from kernel-wedge [09:40] anyway, don't worry.. [09:40] we will look at it tomorrow after i get a proper baz branch and stuff [09:40] sunday.. last day of holidays :) [09:41] shouldn't there be a description too in the package-list? [09:42] and shouldn't there be a shared/package-list too? [09:44] Mithrandir: description can be added to arch/packages-list [09:44] shared/package-list is not taken into account afaik [09:44] last time i did check kernel-wedge code it only use the global provided by kernel-wedge and per arch specific one [09:47] ok === Seveas [n=seveas@seveas.demon.nl] has joined #ubuntu-kernel === doko_ [n=doko___@dsl-084-059-095-057.arcor-ip.net] has joined #ubuntu-kernel === zul [n=chuck@CPE0006258ec6c2-CM000a73655d0e.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com] has joined #ubuntu-kernel [05:06] hey [05:17] fabbione: are you around? === Seveaz [n=seveas@seveas.demon.nl] has joined #ubuntu-kernel === mdke [n=matt@unaffiliated/mdke] has joined #ubuntu-kernel === mdke [n=matt@unaffiliated/mdke] has left #ubuntu-kernel [] === Diablo-D3 [i=diablo@65.99.190.76] has joined #ubuntu-kernel [09:57]

/boot/config-2.6.10-5-k7:CONFIG_PREEMPT=y [09:57]

/boot/config-2.6.12-6-k7:# CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set [09:57]

so... preempt has been turned off in later packages? [10:18] Diablo-D3: you seem to have answered your own question before asking it :-) === mxpxpod [n=bryan@unaffiliated/mxpxpod] has joined #ubuntu-kernel [11:18] mdz: hrm? [11:18] thats the question Im asking, btw [11:18] I dont know whats really goind on [11:18] Diablo-D3: you answered it already [11:18] in 2.6.10-5-k7, CONFIG_PREEMPT=y, and in 2.6.12-6-k7, CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set [11:19] mdz: but that doesnt mean 2.6.12 doesnt have preempt [11:19] say, if, preempt is default in 2.6.12 [11:19] the default is irrelevant; if it is not set, then it is not enabled [11:20] why? === Diablo-D3 doesnt exactly know how kernel makefiles work [11:38] #ubuntu-laptop is open for buisness