FC4 kernel performance

Matthew Miller mattdm at mattdm.org
Thu Jun 23 04:35:35 UTC 2005


On Tue, Jun 21, 2005 at 02:20:36PM -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
> > This has been rehashed a zillion times, but the short answer is that it's
> > not really any good, since the resulting source tree isn't necessarily
> > "clean" for the build architecture you expect. Tweaking the source rpm is a
> > bit more learning and a tiny bit more work upfront, but it makes management
> > easier (worth sometime) and  produces more correct results (priceless).
> Nah. The end result is the same. The difference is that making the

Yeah? Which architecture conditionals do you end up with in your source
tree?

> src.rpm in FC4 creates a source tree that can be moved to /usr/src.
> Making the src.rpm in FC3 (with only source rpm selected in the spec)
> creates a source.rpm

"rpmbuild -bp" if you really need that for some reason.

> The issue is portability which is a tarball in FC4 vs an rpm in FC3. I
> just think that creating an rpm is more consistent with the Fedora
> approach.

Yes, and it's not the approach just to inconvenience people.

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm at mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>
Current office temperature: 80 degrees Fahrenheit.




More information about the devel mailing list