Why is boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz included in the kernel RPM? Why is it not in the grub RPM instead? The reason I ask is that, when using Fedora's kernel, splash.xpm.gz is installed on my PowerPC-based system. Yaboot is used instead of grub on PowerPC.
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:39:59 -0600, W. Michael Petullo mike@flyn.org wrote:
Why is boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz included in the kernel RPM? Why is it not in the grub RPM instead? The reason I ask is that, when using Fedora's kernel, splash.xpm.gz is installed on my PowerPC-based system. Yaboot is used instead of grub on PowerPC.
what? on my x86 fc3 system splash.xpm.gz is part of fedora-logos package in the development i386 tree splash.xpm.gz is part of fedora-logos packages in fact the version of fedora-logos is the same in fc3 as in development at the moment. are you really really sure /boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz on your system is part of the kernel rpm?
-jef
Same here - on x86_64 its in fedora-logos. -Nick
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 19:21:22 -0500, Jeff Spaleta jspaleta@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 16:39:59 -0600, W. Michael Petullo mike@flyn.org wrote:
Why is boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz included in the kernel RPM? Why is it not in the grub RPM instead? The reason I ask is that, when using Fedora's kernel, splash.xpm.gz is installed on my PowerPC-based system. Yaboot is used instead of grub on PowerPC.
what? on my x86 fc3 system splash.xpm.gz is part of fedora-logos package in the development i386 tree splash.xpm.gz is part of fedora-logos packages in fact the version of fedora-logos is the same in fc3 as in development at the moment. are you really really sure /boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz on your system is part of the kernel rpm?
-jef
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
Why is boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz included in the kernel RPM? Why is it not in the grub RPM instead? The reason I ask is that, when using Fedora's kernel, splash.xpm.gz is installed on my PowerPC-based system. Yaboot is used instead of grub on PowerPC.
on my x86 fc3 system splash.xpm.gz is part of fedora-logos package in the development i386 tree splash.xpm.gz is part of fedora-logos packages in fact the version of fedora-logos is the same in fc3 as in development at the moment. are you really really sure /boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz on your system is part of the kernel rpm?
Oops. Let me rephrase my question why is splash.xpm.gz a part of the fedora-logos... Well, that makes a little more sense I suppose (obvious trademark-type material should not go in GRUB RPM). Sorry for the confusion. I suppose /boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz will remain on my system while I patiently wait for GRUB 2's Mac support? I'll concede that a fedora-logos-grub package would be a bit much.
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 20:30 -0600, W. Michael Petullo wrote:
Oops. Let me rephrase my question why is splash.xpm.gz a part of the fedora-logos... Well, that makes a little more sense I suppose (obvious trademark-type material should not go in GRUB RPM). Sorry for the confusion. I suppose /boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz will remain on my system while I patiently wait for GRUB 2's Mac support? I'll concede that a fedora-logos-grub package would be a bit much.
Yes, you do however have better luck as we release a testing tree of Fedora Core 3 so get all excited
And as Jeremy said, its probably a good idea to make fedora-logos *not* arch specific
On Thu, 2004-12-02 at 16:39 -0600, W. Michael Petullo wrote:
Why is boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz included in the kernel RPM? Why is it not in the grub RPM instead? The reason I ask is that, when using Fedora's kernel, splash.xpm.gz is installed on my PowerPC-based system. Yaboot is used instead of grub on PowerPC.
Its fedora-logos-1.1.29-1, I just installed FC-3 on PowerPC (fresh install) to make sure
Looks like fedora-logos needs a fix, but the funny thing is, when you take a look at the fedora-logos.spec file, it has a nice little stub of information that mentions the /boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz bit should be ifarch i386, but its not been implemented/changed :)
I guess this is a peril of having fedora-logos as noarch, as opposed to making it arch-specific
On Sat, 2004-12-04 at 17:18 +0800, Colin Charles wrote:
Looks like fedora-logos needs a fix, but the funny thing is, when you take a look at the fedora-logos.spec file, it has a nice little stub of information that mentions the /boot/grub/splash.xpm.gz bit should be ifarch i386, but its not been implemented/changed :)
I guess this is a peril of having fedora-logos as noarch, as opposed to making it arch-specific
There's no way to fix it without making fedora-logos arch specific. And the value in having it as noarch (and thus the reduced build system load, mirror space requirements, etc) outweigh the few kilobytes it puts on people's systems who don't need it
Jeremy
-
Colin Charles -
Féliciano Matias -
Jef Spaleta -
Jeremy Katz -
Nick Bargnesi -
W. Michael Petullo