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

Re: Plans for tomorrow's (20090529) FESCo meeting



On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Richard W.M. Jones <rjones redhat com> wrote:
> On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 03:33:37PM +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > Or perhaps a future FESCo will revist kmods.
>>
>> FWIW, I'd certainly vote for a proposal to allow kmods if I get into FESCo
>> and may even bring such a proposal in front of the new FESCo (though IMHO
>> it should not be the old regime with explicit FESCo approval for each, that
>> didn't make any sense, instead there should be no restrictions other than a
>> license compatible with that of the kernel, and of course the restrictions
>> applying to all packages).
>
> Could someone dispassionately summarise the reasons why kmods were
> rejected in the first place?  I assume the reason was the overhead of
> maintaining and updating out-of-tree kernel patches?

Because they might break on kernel updates, needs to be rebuild
everytime and in some cases require patches to work.

So we might get in a situation: pushing a kernel update will cause
broken deps for users of kmod-foo -> preventing them from installing
updates -> security risk. (outdated packages)


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