future kernel module rpm situation (was: kernel-source vs. kernel-sourcecode (please revert))

[Dax Kelson]

On Tue, 2004-06-15 at 09:45 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> If I'm understanding Arjan correctly, all references to kernel-source in
> regard 2.6 kernel module building is a bug and all instructions should
> be fixed so that people aren't told to use kernel-source OR
> kernel-sourcecode for module building. 

It isn't just "module" building, it is (primarily in my case) "kernel"
building.

My personal interest in this is as a courseware author and the "kernel
building chapter".

Linux in general has too many needless exceptions. It makes
documentation much more difficult/dense for the writer and the reader. 

As an aside, SUSE 9.1 drops the "k_" kernel RPM naming convention and
has adopted the RH naming convention. Hooray for removing trivial
incompatibilities!! Oh wait, here comes kernel-sourcecode. :( 

> > There are several references to kernel-source that will end up obsoleted
> > and will confuse users. Messages in mailing lists, installation
> > documentation, etc.
> 
> there is installation documentation for fedora?  

Absolutely. Take a visit to your local Barnes and Noble, IT training
class, or as Axel Thimm pointed out, do a google search.

Dax Kelson
Guru Labs