Put an ebuild facility in the upstream kernel[SOLVED]

[unixbhaskar]

BTW.....this is a human being with flesh and blood ....and rigged with fault

What I meant by that?? I mean the title of this post.

Like in the upstream kernel, we have the facility to build rpm package as well as Debian packages from the source. The facilitating scripts are there to assist, and it is darn simple to take advantage of them.

For instance, you just need to pass an argument to the "make" while building the kernel, i.e., make rpmpkg or make deb-pkg

Something similar to providing as " make ebuild" ....

Well, I am sure a lot of competent people have given shot, and it hasn't shown up yet. I must be missing a very basic understanding of the "difficulty" it poses to maintain( I believe other distro scripts are pretty static, and it is quite understandable enough).

BTW, if you miss it, you can ordinarily find those package specific script in the top-level "scripts" directory of the Linux kernel source tree.

Silly confession, I have been making packages out of it for a long time ......see, if my dull head can fathom to some extent of it, anybody could, surely. STRICTLY NO PUN INTENDED.

But I am not yet able to figure out how it could be done .....regarding ebuilds....somebody more accustomed and capable can show the light.

[szatox]

Yeah, this is not happening.
It's flat out impossible.

Debs and rpms are archives. Ebuilds are metadata. The way they are used, they look the same, but they are completely different things under the hood.

[unixbhaskar]

Yeah, this is not happening.
It's flat out impossible.

Debs and rpms are archives. Ebuilds are metadata. The way they are used, they look the same, but they are completely different things under the hood.

Thank you ....but may I say so....a daring one without understanding much .....how about put the facility of "vanilla-soure" in a wrapper?? Please don't fret ....

Like we have git-source .....gentoo-source .....and vanilla-source.......at least some sort thing......I don't want to sound like pressing ....but can't supress my feeling ...

[flexibeast]

Could you please explain what you mean by 'wrapper'? What do you want to be able to do?

If, for example, you'd like to create a 'package' in the form of a single file containing the files resulting from the use of a given ebuild, there are a couple of options:

* Use ebuild(1)'s `package` command to create a .gpkg.tar or .tbz2 binary package tarball for a given ebuild.
* Use quickpkg(1), included in sys-apps/portage, to create a 'package' file containing the files installed via a given ebuild.

[sam_]

It could be done where it produces a gpkg but I don't see the value, especially when it's so easy to use gentoo-kernel or vanilla-kernel for that integrated experience if you want it. With rpm or deb-based distros, it's harder to just patch things or get a package that would be kept up to date (you can produce your own .rpm but nothing facilitates that being updated or anything, whereas you could e.g. easily make a live ebuild as we have for vanilla-kernel just fine).

Keep in mind binpkgs of gentoo-kernel and vanilla-kernel already work.

What do you want to do and why?

[szatox]

It could be done where it produces a gpkg but I don't see the value, especially when it's so easy to use gentoo-kernel or vanilla-kernel for that integrated experience if you want it.

Well, having portage track customized kernels' files would be a nice feature.
I think it would make more sense to just add an "install" flag triggering make oldconfig, make and make install, instead of pushing it into the kernel. And then we still need some way to trigger initramfs update, and possibly also bootloader config update, and things are getting quite complicated.

[sam_]

It could be done where it produces a gpkg but I don't see the value, especially when it's so easy to use gentoo-kernel or vanilla-kernel for that integrated experience if you want it.

Well, having portage track customized kernels' files would be a nice feature.
I think it would make more sense to just add an "install" flag triggering make oldconfig, make and make install, instead of pushing it into the kernel. And then we still need some way to trigger initramfs update, and possibly also bootloader config update, and things are getting quite complicated.

I don't know what you mean, they're tracked with dist kernels already. And having make install do anything smart is covered by installkernel hooks today too.

[unixbhaskar]

It could be done where it produces a gpkg but I don't see the value, especially when it's so easy to use gentoo-kernel or vanilla-kernel for that integrated experience if you want it.

Well, having portage track customized kernels' files would be a nice feature.
I think it would make more sense to just add an "install" flag triggering make oldconfig, make and make install, instead of pushing it into the kernel. And then we still need some way to trigger initramfs update, and possibly also bootloader config update, and things are getting quite complicated.

IOW, precisely to build the damn kernel from the source. In a sense, when we call "make gpkg" , it will do the "vanilla-kernel" process .

Just to expand and extend the make file in the upstream.

Am I clear enough??

[unixbhaskar]

It could be done where it produces a gpkg but I don't see the value, especially when it's so easy to use gentoo-kernel or vanilla-kernel for that integrated experience if you want it. With rpm or deb-based distros, it's harder to just patch things or get a package that would be kept up to date (you can produce your own .rpm but nothing facilitates that being updated or anything, whereas you could e.g. easily make a live ebuild as we have for vanilla-kernel just fine).

Keep in mind binpkgs of gentoo-kernel and vanilla-kernel already work.

What do you want to do and why?

Just to make the process and experience seamless. Instead looking for specific thing to emerge i.e. vanilla-kernel and build it , rather just do "make gpkg" in the kernel source directory and it will do the vanilla-kernel process.

[szatox]

I don't know what you mean, they're tracked with dist kernels already.

Dist kernels are distributed as precompiled binaries, aren't they?
So they are not custom. I can't either configure or patch them, can I?
To be fair there is eclean-kernel, which helps with removing old files. Unfortunately, it is a bit of a manual process and feels hacky.

Installkenrel hooks are a good point. I'm still on genkernel, so I never paid much attention to it... So far.

[sam_]

I don't know what you mean, they're tracked with dist kernels already.

Dist kernels are distributed as precompiled binaries, aren't they?
So they are not custom. I can't either configure or patch them, can I?
To be fair there is eclean-kernel, which helps with removing old files. Unfortunately, it is a bit of a manual process and feels hacky.

Installkenrel hooks are a good point. I'm still on genkernel, so I never paid much attention to it... So far.

No, you can indeed configure and patch them. gentoo-kernel-bin is a binary, gentoo-kernel and vanilla-kernel are not. See https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Distributi ... figuration and I use /etc/portage/patches for it like any other package.

[szatox]

Ok, so I happen to be using gentoo-sources, and I do actually patch them with portage.
Source files are tracked by portage. That parts is fine. But is not usable, yet.
I have to build the kernel and install it. This part happens outside of portage, so portage is unable to track kernel images, kernel modules, and initramfs images, and those files must be manually cleaned up once they are no longer needed.

Did we get on the same page now, or is there some new functionality in portage I'm completely unaware of?
I think installkernel can rebuild initramfs, but I don't suppose it adds advanced portage integration too?

It would be nice if building and installing kernels could be done inside of portage in addition to (or maybe even instead of) sources, and it would be the Gentoo equivalent of building debs and rpms from kernel's make script, but it doesn't seem to play well with emerge's dependency graph.

[pietinger]

Ok, so I happen to be using gentoo-sources, and I do actually patch them with portage. [...]

Dont use gentoo-sources if you want portage to do all the jobs.

[...] It would be nice if building and installing kernels could be done inside of portage [...]

What you want is already available: Install (=emerge) gentoo-kernel. You want a kernel with your own settings? Set them ONCE in /etc/kernel/config.d (*) and portage will do all the jobs you want.

*) ... or use savedconfig .... see more here: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Distributi ... figuration

[sam_]

Ok, so I happen to be using gentoo-sources, and I do actually patch them with portage.
Source files are tracked by portage. That parts is fine. But is not usable, yet.
I have to build the kernel and install it. This part happens outside of portage, so portage is unable to track kernel images, kernel modules, and initramfs images, and those files must be manually cleaned up once they are no longer needed.

Did we get on the same page now, or is there some new functionality in portage I'm completely unaware of?
I think installkernel can rebuild initramfs, but I don't suppose it adds advanced portage integration too?

It would be nice if building and installing kernels could be done inside of portage in addition to (or maybe even instead of) sources, and it would be the Gentoo equivalent of building debs and rpms from kernel's make script, but it doesn't seem to play well with emerge's dependency graph.

gentoo-sources != gentoo-kernel. gentoo-kernel handles building and installation too. It Just Works.

[unixbhaskar]

Ok, so I happen to be using gentoo-sources, and I do actually patch them with portage.
Source files are tracked by portage. That parts is fine. But is not usable, yet.
I have to build the kernel and install it. This part happens outside of portage, so portage is unable to track kernel images, kernel modules, and initramfs images, and those files must be manually cleaned up once they are no longer needed.

Did we get on the same page now, or is there some new functionality in portage I'm completely unaware of?
I think installkernel can rebuild initramfs, but I don't suppose it adds advanced portage integration too?

It would be nice if building and installing kernels could be done inside of portage in addition to (or maybe even instead of) sources, and it would be the Gentoo equivalent of building debs and rpms from kernel's make script, but it doesn't seem to play well with emerge's dependency graph.

gentoo-sources != gentoo-kernel. gentoo-kernel handles building and installation too. It Just Works.

You are hell bent on something we are not talking about. WHY??????

WE ARE DREAMING OF DOING THIS:

make gpkg or whatever on upstream kernel source dir to get the damn the job done.

[Hu]

unixbhaskar: you are set on doing that. szatox had a question inspired by, but distinct from, your request. sam_ and pietinger explained that what szatox wanted already existed, and required a different technique than szatox had been using.

unixbhaskar: please be more polite. It's not clear why what you're describing is so wonderful. Even if you could make a gpkg using only upstream kernel scripts, how would you then cause it to be installed? If the answer involves running emerge, then how is what you're wanting better than the existing Gentoo offering that can build and install the kernel, all using just emerge?

[unixbhaskar]

unixbhaskar: you are set on doing that. szatox had a question inspired by, but distinct from, your request. sam_ and pietinger explained that what szatox wanted already existed, and required a different technique than szatox had been using.

unixbhaskar: please be more polite. It's not clear why what you're describing is so wonderful. Even if you could make a gpkg using only upstream kernel scripts, how would you then cause it to be installed? If the answer involves running emerge, then how is what you're wanting better than the existing Gentoo offering that can build and install the kernel, all using just emerge?

Pardon me???!!!!

Case in points to your answer:

One, we(read I) expect a simple "make" target on upstream kernel source tree .......as you said, ....I probably set on doing that....as this thread getting deviated and derailed. ...Thanks.

Second, We( read I) don't care about installing it the build image, just BUILD IT via some mechanism(read script, aka make target) . Does other distros script install the stuff??????? ( I know comparing is a fatal thing, you helped me)

Oh, btw, if I have enough bent of mind( Which clearly I not have, no pun intended) , @hu do you think this thread would have exists???????????

[b11n]

Since what you seem to want involves changes to the upstream kernel, perhaps you could approach the LKML with your proposal.

Please link any response you get back here. We (read I) would… like to see it.

(cool tweets, btw)

[unixbhaskar]

Since what you seem to want involves changes to the upstream kernel, perhaps you could approach the LKML with your proposal.

Please link any response you get back here. We (read I) would… like to see it.

(cool tweets, btw)

Thanks....I was expecting a more direct answer then this from the "experts" of this distro .....sigh ....

[pietinger]

Since what you seem to want involves changes to the upstream kernel, perhaps you could approach the LKML with your proposal.

Please link any response you get back here. We (read I) would… like to see it.

(cool tweets, btw)

Thanks....I was expecting a more direct answer then this from the "experts" of this distro .....sigh ....

I will give you several direct answers here:

1. You may have misinterpreted @b11n's post.

2. If you contact LKML, you will encounter one of the following reactions:
2a. Hearty laughter, or
2b. Complete ignorance, or
2c. If you behave as badly there as you do here, an immediate ban.

3. You probably have no experience with the Linux kernel, otherwise you would know that your desired "make gpkg" already exists; it's called "make defconfig"

I say the following with my moderator hat on:

I and the entire moderation team expect respect for other users here in all matters - including our developers, who have been ensuring that you can use Gentoo free of charge for over 18 years. If you refer to one of our best and most active developers here in the forum - who is always ready to help everyone here in our forum - as an “expert” in quotation marks, this will have consequences if repeated.

[flexibeast]

i'm not sure i'm understanding the discussion correctly, so sorry if i'm very off-base with this:

Does using ebuild(1), as i mentioned in my comment upthread, not do what's required? E.g.:

Code: Select all

$ cd /var/db/repos/gentoo/sys-kernel/vanilla-sources/
$ ebuild vanilla-sources-6.19.2.ebuild package

which should result in a .gpkg.tar or .tbz2 file being created in PKGDIR.

Is the problem that this process will actually install the result of the build on the system (although of course it can be immediately removed)?

[unixbhaskar]

Since what you seem to want involves changes to the upstream kernel, perhaps you could approach the LKML with your proposal.

Please link any response you get back here. We (read I) would… like to see it.

(cool tweets, btw)

Thanks....I was expecting a more direct answer then this from the "experts" of this distro .....sigh ....

I will give you several direct answers here:

1. You may have misinterpreted @b11n's post.

2. If you contact LKML, you will encounter one of the following reactions:
2a. Hearty laughter, or
2b. Complete ignorance, or
2c. If you behave as badly there as you do here, an immediate ban.

3. You probably have no experience with the Linux kernel, otherwise you would know that your desired "make gpkg" already exists; it's called "make defconfig"

I say the following with my moderator hat on:

I and the entire moderation team expect respect for other users here in all matters - including our developers, who have been ensuring that you can use Gentoo free of charge for over 18 years. If you refer to one of our best and most active developers here in the forum - who is always ready to help everyone here in our forum - as an “expert” in quotation marks, this will have consequences if repeated.

Thanks!!

[szatox]

gentoo-sources != gentoo-kernel. gentoo-kernel handles building and installation too. It Just Works.

Huh.... That's interesting. Back in the days when I installed, this package wasn't a thing yet, and I never had a reason to change an already working setup.
I'll definitely check it out now, it might actually be an upgrade from genkernel. Thanks.

@unixbhaskar, this might actually be as close match for your original question as they come.
I stand by my earlier answer that generating ebuilds from kernel's makefile is absolutely impossible. Still, debs and rpms are actual "packages", while ebuilds are more similar to "package recipes".
So, if you want to "create kernel debs but for gentoo", then using emerge to build binary packages for gentoo-kernel might be exactly what you're looking for. You enable building binary packages with either -B (build only, without installing on the host), -b, or FEATURES=buildpkg

[unixbhaskar]

gentoo-sources != gentoo-kernel. gentoo-kernel handles building and installation too. It Just Works.

Huh.... That's interesting. Back in the days when I installed, this package wasn't a thing yet, and I never had a reason to change an already working setup.
I'll definitely check it out now, it might actually be an upgrade from genkernel. Thanks.

@unixbhaskar, this might actually be as close match for your original question as they come.
I stand by my earlier answer that generating ebuilds from kernel's makefile is absolutely impossible. Still, debs and rpms are actual "packages", while ebuilds are more similar to "package recipes".
So, if you want to "create kernel debs but for gentoo", then using emerge to build binary packages for gentoo-kernel might be exactly what you're looking for. You enable building binary packages with either -B (build only, without installing on the host), -b, or FEATURES=buildpkg

@szatox

Thank you so much! Honestly you "almost nailed it" .....I have figured it out ....it is certainly NOT Gentoo's problem or requirement. But I wanted to have similar experiene(like other distros's have faciliy upstream) with minimal fuss.

Installing was NEVER my concern. Just wanted to build the damn package...that's it.

The process:

Get the latest tarbal or better git source .. then several git command to make it as per my liking ( I did the same for other distros too) .

Copy my existing config from /boot folder to .config ....so it persists..........( Gentoo' s way are superb, ....but I am not going in that route)

Lots of VARIABLE set and unset by calling config........

Then usual things i.e make localmodconfig

Then make -j(nproc)

Then modules_install

If and only if, I need the initramfs , I will call the dracut or other variants to accomplish the job( outside the scope of above task)

And finally installed , those i.e. kernel and initramfs BY HAND.

[b11n]

Huh.... That's interesting. Back in the days when I installed, this package wasn't a thing yet, and I never had a reason to change an already working setup.
I'll definitely check it out now, it might actually be an upgrade from genkernel. Thanks.

It's pretty good. If you like how Portage works, it brings the same game to kernel installation. Use a binary if you want, or customise the build how you want and let Portage take care of the boring stuff. Upgrade it as easy as any other package.

OP, seriously take note. Everybody's trying to tell you the 'damn' thing you want is already there. Stop getting all shouty about it.