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

Re: kernel posttrans and preun hooks for other packages



On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 12:35:19PM -0500, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2008 at 09:53:26AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=433121
> > 
> > DKMS would like to have the opportunity to run it's
> > auto-rebuilder/installer after a new kernel RPM has been installed,
> > without having to wait for a system restart to run it.  Likewise, when
> > a kernel RPM is removed, it would like to be able to run to remove
> > modules managed by it.
> > 
> > Debian kernels intentionally run scripts located in
> > /etc/kernel/postinst.d/ following new kernel package installation,
> > /etc/kernel/prerm.d/ before kernel package removal.  DKMS drops a
> > script into these directories, to perform the appropriate actions.
> > 
> > I want Fedora and RHEL kernels to do likewise.  Patch attached.
> > This patch implements the same interface as that used for Debian and
> > Ubuntu kernels.  The scripts are invoked with $1 = kernel version, and
> > $2 = path to vmlinuz file.  (DKMS doesn't need $2, but I'm keeping the
> > interface the same to match so people can reuse their scriptlets.)
> 
> I argued against this idea in RHEL because I believe blindly running
> random scripts in a directory is an unsafe thing to do (despite its best
> intentions it can still be abused).
> 
> Also from a support perspective, it becomes more complicated to support
> kernel installs when random user scripts can cause unknown behaviour.

This has been the argument against DKMS for 5 years now.  However, in
those 5 years, how many support calls has Red Hat taken where a
DKMS-ified driver turned out to be the problem?  Where it wasn't
obvious what was happening?  'dkms status' is even part of sysreport,
and has been for at least 3 years.

I'd accept a change to new-kernel-package rpmposttrans() that invokes
the DKMS script directly, as opposed to looping through a plug-in
directory, if that makes people feel any better.  I suspect it doesn't
though.

Waiting on a higher-level tool to assist the support guys ask for
'dkms status' info may be appropriate for RHEL, but not for Fedora.

-- 
Matt Domsch
Linux Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO
linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux


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