Attention kernel module project packagers!

[David Woodhouse]

On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 09:27 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Arguing over which ugly ass hack to apply to be able to package kernel modules 
> is a bikeshed argument.

I'm not necessarily suggesting that we shouldn't have an agreed method
of building kernel module packages at all -- just that we shouldn't have
any such packages in Core or Extras.

There _are_ relatively sane (and legal, unlike nvidia/ati stuff) cases
where one might want to build a separate module -- like the NTFS modules
in Livna, for example. And other 'new drivers' which aren't yet
upstream. Of course you're right when you agree with me that those new
drivers shouldn't be in Core or Extras -- but that doesn't mean we
shouldn't provide a way to package them at all.

So I think it _is_ worthwhile having the debate about how kernel module
packages can be done -- I just don't think it's worth getting
_particularly_ worked up about.

-- 
dwmw2