kernel.spec kernel-install integration

[Josh Boyer]

On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 04:25:03PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> On 05/02/2013 09:06 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 05, 2013 at 02:13:18PM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> >> Am 04.04.2013 22:17, schrieb Peter Jones:
> >>> On Thu, Apr 04, 2013 at 07:48:14AM +0200, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> >>>> Hi Josh,
> >>>>
> >>>> as mentioned on IRC, here is the patch for the rawhide kernel.spec.
> >>>>
> >>>> This patch is part of an upstream coordination, intended to unify the various
> >>>> ways distributions handle:
> >>>>
> >>>> - installation of kernels in the system
> >>>> - create the matching initrds; hooking up the various implementations of
> >>>>   initramfs generators into the kernel package installation process
> >>>> - optionally/automatically create bootable rescue images to be able to recover
> >>>>   from failures:
> >>>>   https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/DracutHostOnly
> >>>>
> >>>> All the above functionality is provided by the “kernel-install” tool:
> >>>> http://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/kernel-install.html
> >>>>
> >>>> It features:
> >>>> - flexible hookup/plugin directories to manage kernel installation and
> >>>>   uninstallation. initrd, bootloader, rescue image management, all plug into
> >>>>   that facility.
> >>>>
> >>>> - strict separation of distribution-supplied logic and local customization
> >>>>   logic; system administrators are able to overwrite and replace/extend any part
> >>>>   of the default logic if needed
> >>>>
> >>>> - hide distribution-specific logic behind a standardized command line interface
> >>>>
> >>>> - unify the custom kernel installation from the source tree with the usual
> >>>>   kernel package installation; like the current /sbin/installkernel
> >>>
> >>> Is there git repo for this other than just the normal systemd repo?
> >>> When I look there right now I don't see very much - it looks like it
> >>> only handles gummy-boot - before we do this, what's the plan for all the
> >>> architectures we support that /don't/ work with gummy-boot style configs?
> >>> Right now that's basically everything except x86, and even that isn't
> >>> really fully fleshed out yet.
> >>>
> >>> Too be honest, kernel-install as it stands is a bit distasteful - what's
> >>> the point of breaking everything out into plugin directories if you're
> >>> not going to handle generation of /boot/loader/entries through a plugin?
> >>> That means if you're hacking on it or just trying to figure out what
> >>> happened on a machine, you have to go looking at both the plugin
> >>> directory and the script that runs it.  All of the stuff to manage
> >>> /boot/loader/entries should be moved into a plugin to avoid that.
> >>>
> >>> It should be possible to re-factor new-kernel-package to be something we
> >>> can run from your plugin directories, but we should talk about what that
> >>> looks like before we do something like this to the kernel package and
> >>> simply break everything.
> >>>
> >>
> >> We want to have a distro agnostic API for installing the kernel. new-kernel-pkg
> >> is fedora only and with systemd we provide tools for every distribution.
> >>
> >> dracut (also not fedora-only) already ships with a plugin for kernel-install.
> >>
> >> Other distributions start to make use of kernel-install right now.
> >>
> >> Changing the fedora kernel.spec today would not *break* anything, because
> >> kernel-install is currently patched in fedora to call new-kernel-pkg.
> >> http://pkgs.fedoraproject.org/cgit/systemd.git/tree/kernel-install-grubby.patch
> >>
> >> It would be great to convert grubby to hook into the kernel-install callouts
> >> instead of being called from new-kernel-package, but this is an optional next
> >> step, that you would need to decide on, if you agree. It does not affect the
> >> introduction of kernel-install at this point, nothing should break.
> > 
> > So while things aren't going to break, this doesn't really address
> > Peter's question of why the loader entries aren't also handled via
> > plugins, does it?
> > 
> > I'd like to get some resolution on this by 3.10-rc1 so we can get it
> > into rawhide, but it does seem like a fair question.  Maybe I missed the
> > answer somewhere.
> > 
> > josh
> 
> fixed
> http://cgit.freedesktop.org/systemd/systemd/commit/?id=8f51399e75e5d0d0741ecb18c549a57840bd1cc3

Great.  I'm working on adding your kernel.spec patch today.  The changes
I've included are the bump in the dracut version, prereq'ing systemd >=
203-2 instead of 200, and dropping the depmod call in the posttrans
macro.

Assuming it works fine in my testing on a rawhide VM, it should make
rawhide tomorrow.  If I hit a problem, I'll reply here.  If anyone else
has questions/comments, now would be the time to make them.

josh