[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: No more kernel-source(code) ??? (was: rawhide report: 20040623 changes)



Hi *,

Am So, den 04.07.2004 schrieb Axel Thimm um 14:25:

[...]

> So all is solved if
> 
> o kernel building splits subpackages into kernel and kernel-headers
> o kernel-headers are per arch and flavour and are installed under say
>   /usr/src/kernel-headers/`uname -r`.<arch>
> o /lib/modules/`uname -r`/build (part of the kernel subpackage)
>   becomes a symlink to /usr/src/kernel-headers/`uname -r`.<arch>
> 
> Benefits:
> 
> o Users can install the kernel-header package matching their kernel and
>   create all modules they'd like either manually or from kernel
>   modules src.rpms
> o ISVs/Packagers can install as many kernel-header rpms and build
>   kernel module rpms for the whole lot of them w/o
>   installing/deinstalling kernel-headers or even whole kernels.
> o Vendors are happy they found a solution that work for all
> 
> Drawbacks:
> o Users will have to install kernel-header-`uname -r` for building
>   kernel modules.
> 
> I think the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks.

Me too, but as far a I interpret Arjan he is not willing to accept the 

> o Users will have to install kernel-header-`uname -r` for building
>   kernel modules.

But couldn't that solved if the kernel package itself always Requires
the install of the matching kernel-header-`uname -r` package?

CU
thl



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]