[RFC PATCH v1] powerpc: Add version to install filenames

[Michael Ellerman]

Nick Child <nnac123 at linux.ibm.com> writes:
> Rather than replacing the versionless vmlinux and System.map files,
> copy to files with the version info appended.
>
> Additionally, since executing the script is a last resort option,
> inform the user about the missing `installkernel` command and the
> location of the installation.
>
> This work is adapted from `arch/s390/boot/install.sh`.
>
> Signed-off-by: Nick Child <nnac123 at linux.ibm.com>
> ---
>
> Hoping I am not breaking someones dependency on targeting /boot/vmlinux
> so RFC'ing.

It will probably break *someone*'s workflow :)

> I typically have kernelinstall on my LPARs and installing and rebooting
> goes peacefully.
>
> Recently, I did not have kernelinstall and `make install` seemed to behave
> differently. I got very little output but a succeful return code. After
> initramfs issues during boot I dug into the makefiles a bit to figure out
> where execution was differing. When `kernelinstall` cannot be found, we
> invoke `arch/powerpc/boot/install.sh` instead. I am primarily interested
> in getting more information relayed to the user about what is going on.
>
> The changes to installing with the version appended are more of an afterthought
> that makes sense to me but could understand why someone may depend on consistent
> filenames.
>
> Opening as RFC for opinions/rejections/concerns.

TIL arch/powerpc/boot/install.sh even exists :)

I generally netboot kernels, so I don't really use `make install` that
much. But I know some folks do, though they probably have
`installkernel` installed as a rule.

Still this change seems sensible, and putting the version in the file
names matches what arm, s390, arm64 and riscv do.

See if anyone else has an opinion.

cheers