[ATrpms-users] questions about atrpms

[Axel Thimm]

Hi,

On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 12:17:08PM -0600, peter abplanalp wrote:
> 
> hi all,
> 
> i'm sorry if these are faq's but i couldn't find a good searchable
> archive for atrpms and my google searches weren't fruitful.  i have
> recently tried to rebuild 3 myth boxes on centos 5 with mixed
> success.  i had trouble with the madawifi kernel module and the ivtv
> kernel module.  also, because i use the blaster on one of my
> pvr150's, i can't use the atrpms lirc kernel module.
> 
> so, my questions:
> 
> 1) should i be posting bugs to bugzilla for kernel modules that
> don't work for me?

It depends on the nature of the problem, see below.

> i ask because ivtv worked on one of my 3 boxes but not the other
> two; however, manually compiling and installing ivtv worked just
> fine.

If the setup worked on similar hardware and not on other then
something looks misconfigured. Maybe you installed the kmdl for the
wrong kernel/arch?

> if i should post a bug, what information should i post.

Everything that helps debugging starting with the exact description of
the failure including relevavnt cut & paste output from errors/logs
etc.

> 2) is it possible for me to build my own rpms from the srpms?  i did
> find a little info on this through google but it was mostly of the
> sort "don't do this" due to missing macros and it probably not
> working anyway but the email was from 2005.  is this still the case?
> if not, where can i get the latest macros?

Install atrpms-rpm-config, but the warnings still apply. Simply
rebuilding the kmdls will nopt make problems go away, one needs to
identify the problem first.

> 3) it looks like a lot of the packages for centos 5 are in the
> testing repo.  is there a road map for getting these into the stable
> repo?

Perhaps "never". These packages are there because they replace
packages from CentOS, so for users that want to play it 100% safe the
stable repo does not offer any replacements. In the future there will
be two repos that will allow/disallow replacements of vendor parts.

IMHO there is nothing really wrong with replacing parts of the vendor
if needed, but some users don't want that.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.atrpms.net/pipermail/atrpms-users/attachments/20070904/8c08b059/attachment.bin