[01:49] <BigBear> what i/o scedular does ubuntu use by defualt?
[11:51] <_ruben> hrm .. i want to take an existing kernel version (say: 2.6.24-16.30), and want to roll my own version of it (including 2 small patches) .. currently im rebuilding using the old make-kpkg approach, but im having difficulties mimicing the 'standard' versioning scheme
[11:55] <alex_joni> _ruben: grab it from git, and make a custom flavour
[11:59] <_ruben> hmm .. sounds like smth i could investigate indeed
[12:00] <alex_joni> there is a quide around wiki.ubuntu.com about building kernels from git
[12:00] <alex_joni> that should get you started
[12:01] <_ruben> havent checked wiki yet, using https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Kernel/Compile now
[12:01] <alex_joni> ok, that sounds good
[12:02] <alex_joni> you need to mess with debian/binary-custom.d/
[12:03] <alex_joni> add another custom binary flavour, put you patches and config there
[12:03] <alex_joni> then build using: "AUTOBUILD=1 NOEXTRAS=1 fakeroot debian/rules custom-binary-FLAVOUR"
[12:08] <_ruben> git clone in progress
[12:14] <_ruben> hmm .. the git/flavour approach seems pretty straightforward .. nice job
[12:19] <_ruben> to get the -server config .. i'd just cat debian/config/$ARCH/config and debian/config/$ARCH/config.server to one file i guess/
[13:44] <munckfish> BenC: got a sec?
[13:45] <BenC> munckfish: sure
[13:45] <munckfish> Over the weekend I sent a pull request for Linux Ports cause I've finally managed to get together a stable build for the PS3
[13:46] <munckfish> I just wanted to know what the next steps are to get it into the intrepid repos
[13:46] <munckfish> note that I haven't been able to test build on anything but Cell
[13:46] <munckfish> so I don't know what the options are for the other arch's
[13:46] <munckfish> BenC: over
[13:47] <BenC> munckfish: I'll take a look after I catch up on email (been off for a week)
[13:47] <munckfish> BenC: sure take your time
[13:49] <_ruben> how can i get my kernel git tree to 'represent' 2.6.24-19.41 ? .. i just want to apply 2 small patches to a given kernel and not change anything else (code-wise)
[13:58]  * _ruben lacks proper git skills and background info on the kernel git tree
[13:59] <munckfish> _ruben: can you not apply them to the current development version of the kernel from the ubuntu-hardy git tree?
[14:00] <munckfish> http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/ubuntu-hardy.git;a=summary
[14:00] <munckfish> Or do you specifically just want to add these patches for yourself and do not intent to contribute them?
[14:05] <_ruben> munckfish: personal (testing) use only .. im interesting in performance differences :)
[14:07] <munckfish> _ruben: the easiest way is to just checkout the hardy source as is and work with the current development version
[14:07] <munckfish> _ruben: the less easy way is to create a branch starting on 2.6.24-19.41
[14:07] <_ruben> munckfish: how "less easy" would that be? :)
[14:08] <munckfish> it's worth you look at the docs for git branch and git checkout
[14:08] <_ruben> i browsed the commit log, but couldnt even pinpoint the exact commit to take as reference (19.41 is mentioned multiple times)
[14:08] <munckfish> you can reference the tag for that version
[14:08] <munckfish> see "git tag"
[14:09] <_ruben> ah, nice
[14:09] <munckfish> Stefan Bader tagged the version you want here: http://kernel.ubuntu.com/git?p=ubuntu/ubuntu-hardy.git;a=commit;h=0717f584cfe10c9772b1b5daba51485c419fbe18
[14:09] <munckfish> instead of specify a branch to to branch from
[14:09] <munckfish> give the tag name instead
[14:09] <munckfish> Git is a great great system - but it does take a while to get to grips with it
[14:10] <_ruben> seems reading up on git is smth to add on my (huge) todo list
[14:10] <munckfish> worth it though imo
[14:10] <munckfish> Yeah I'd recommend it - have you seen the Ubuntu kernel KnowledgeBase docs?
[14:11] <munckfish> they're on the wiki
[14:11] <munckfish> _ruben: you'll need to follow the instructions on the Maintenance guide to make a kernel build which ends up as a deb
[14:13] <munckfish> that is without building loads of stuff you don't need just to test something
[14:14] <_ruben> still havent checked the wiki yet .. working with https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Kernel/Compile .. will search the wiki now
[14:15] <_ruben> actually i had the wiki open as well .. just not a very helpfull page (for me) https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelGitGuide
[14:18] <amitk> _ruben: https://wiki.ubuntu.com/KernelMaintenance
[14:18] <_ruben> amitk: was just reading that one
[14:18] <amitk> ..if you are looking to build Ubuntu-based kernsl
[14:18] <_ruben> tho my current quest is more a git one than a kernel one i'd say :p
[14:19] <_ruben> as in: "how to gt my git tree to represent 2.6.24-19.41 instead of head"
[14:19] <_ruben> but kernel.org isnt liking me thusfar (for the git docs)
[14:24] <amitk> _ruben: any reason you do not want to clone the kernel tree from kernel.ubuntu.com?
[14:25] <_ruben> amitk: i am using that, mentioned kernel.org wrt documentation of git :)
[14:36] <_ruben> hmm .. my custom kernel build (based on uptodate git tree) has a linux-headers packages which depends on linux-headers-2.6.24-22 but that one doesnt get build
[14:45] <_ruben> debian/rules binary-headers seems to do that trick :)
[15:10] <munckfish> _ruben: unless you really need the headers you should just be able to install the linux-image-* package
[15:11] <_ruben> munckfish: i needed the headers to recompile a kmod .. but i succeeded at that .. and so far im not seeing any performance difference .. so this little project goes in the fridge for now :)
[15:12] <munckfish> ok
[15:13] <_ruben> thanks for the help/pointers tho