More modularization.

[Peter Lemenkov]

On Sat, 19 Nov 2005, Arjan van de Ven wrote:

>> Who tolds about stable ABI-interface? I just suggest to split kernel 
>> into a number of packages and add "virtual" one, that install all of 
>> them. Of course, then someone will upgrade the kernel *all* installed 
>> packages would be upgraded.

> abi matters a lot in this really. If you don't have a stable ABI, the
> version dependencies get *really* messy, and the user experience goes
> down the drain unless.. you make all drivers mandatory again. At which
> point you have to ask yourself: "Why do this again"

Who told about ABI at all? I told about splitting kernel-package within 
the particular version, *not* about partial upgrade (say, kernel will be 
2.6.14-1.1700, although video-driver is still from some previous kernel - 
that's a situation there ABI do matter!). User will be forced to upgrade 
all its modules, then he changes its kernel.

Everything will be ok, if every little package with kernel module inside 
will have

> Requires: kernel = 2.6.14-1.1688

or something of that kind.

Look - we got livna's kernel modules. They're all installs and runs w/o 
troubles. Guess why? Look at "requires" :).

Ok, summarizing - i suggest a way to strip down the kernel package, thus 
reducing its weight (my handmade kernel for my PC weights about 2 mbytes - 
compare with 40+ mbytes of FC's generic kernel). If every module would 
have proper "requires"-field, all would be OK. :)

Of course, when upgrading, yum must upgrading only those modules, which 
user choosed before (the way xorg-x11-drivers do, - note! I don't say 
about ABI - aii things are done within particular kernel, w/o mixing 
modules).

-- 
With best regards, Peter Lemenkov.