Skip to content

Dkms based packaging structure #2

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ShivamVashisth28
Copy link

Summary

This pull request introduces the complete structure and files required to build and package Lunatik (version 3.6.2) using DKMS. It includes:

  • The full source tree under lunatik-3.6.2/
  • Debian packaging files (e.g., debian/control, debian/rules, dkms.conf, etc.)
  • Quilt patches applied for namespace separation
  • Instructions and supporting changes needed to test the built package

The goal is to make the DKMS packaging process reproducible and aligned with Debian policy standards.


Steps to Build and Test the Package

To build and test the DKMS-based Lunatik package, follow these steps:

  1. Inside the lunatik-3.6.2/ directory, run:

    sudo debuild -us -uc
  2. Once the build completes, move one directory up:

    cd ..
  3. Install the generated .deb packages:

    sudo dpkg -i lunatik-dkms*.deb
    sudo dpkg -i lunatik_amd64*.deb
  4. After installation, run the Lunatik CLI:

    sudo lunatik

Current Issue

Upon launching lunatik, the kernel modules fail to load. Running:

sudo dmesg | tail

reveals symbol-related errors, particularly conflicts between ZFS and Lunatik.


Debugging Efforts So Far

To resolve this, the following steps were attempted:

  • Introduced a separate namespace for Lunatik to avoid symbol clashes.
  • Applied changes using a patch via quilt and included them in the packaging process.

Despite this, the issue with symbol conflicts remains unresolved.


Proposed Next Steps

Two possible directions are under consideration:

  1. Investigate and Patch
    Analyze the exact cause of the naming or symbol conflict and attempt to resolve it by refining the existing patch.

  2. Rework the Packaging Approach
    Consider starting the packaging process from scratch, possibly using a non-DKMS-based build method


Please review the added structure and build steps. Feedback and suggestions for improving the namespace handling or alternative packaging strategies are welcome.

@marcelstanley marcelstanley mentioned this pull request Jun 23, 2025
@marcelstanley
Copy link
Collaborator

@ShivamVashisth28 you must not replicate or copy all files from lunatik to this repo to test the package build.

I cannot tell, by looking at this PR, what you have changed in the code to build the debian packages.

This PR should contain only the necessary files to build the packages. The build process should work by adding lunatik_packages as a submodule to lunatik in a way that you can build the debian packages from there, no the other way around.

@lneto
Copy link

lneto commented Jun 24, 2025

please, please.. always provide full logs @ShivamVashisth28.. 🔮 🔮 🔮

@ShivamVashisth28
Copy link
Author

ShivamVashisth28 commented Jun 24, 2025

@marcelstanley Yes got your point, but I provided the repo so that it becomes easier for you to just clone this branch , and test it, later on it will only contain the debian files.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants