[Fedora-packaging] Re: kmdls: very good support for custom kernels (was: kernel-module packaging discussing ...)

[Axel Thimm]

On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:54:06PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 
> 
> Axel Thimm schrieb:
> > On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 01:11:57PM +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> >> On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 13:36 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> 
> [ignoring the FUD debatte]
> 
> [ignoring the arch debatte]
> 
> > And to cut to the chase: Ever tried to support special kernel rpms
> > like swsusp2 or ccrma's low-latency kernels? I did and know it works
> > for kmdl and will fail with kmod.
> 
> I looked into this once and I'd like to give people a bit more
> background from my point of view:
> 
> Yes, kmod fails for the swsusp2 kernel from http://mhensler.de/swsusp/.
> But that's not directly a bug/problem in kmod. kmods would work if the
> swsusp2 kernel would be packaged exactly in the same way as the FC
> kernels are packaged. But that's not the case.

which was done deliberately to not conflict with having the same name
with a Fedora package, just as the highest mandate coming from Fedora
to 3rd parties is, right?

Just FYI FC4 packages do still have the same name with FC, "kernel",
which means that once you start using a swsups2 kernel your normal
vendor kernels don't get updated because swsups2 is evr-newer. And
CCRMA's kernel had been following the "kernel" naming, but have lower
evr that the vendor's, which mean that yum doesn't ever upgrade the
CCRMA kernel. CCRMA therefore had to replace FC's yum with a pathced
version. So both cases in 'packaged exactly in the same way as the FC
kernels' are rather disastrous and in automatic conflict with other FC
credos like no replacing of core packages like kernel/yum.

Pick your choice in kmod land:

o lock in onto custom kernels due to exact naming with the vendor's
o no updates to your custom kernel due to exact naming with the vendor's
o no support for custom kernels due to different naming with the vendor's

...

-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/attachments/20060818/150d8a52/attachment.sig>