[fab] kernel modules

[Jesse Keating]

On Wednesday 20 September 2006 12:19, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> If you're referring to yum's behaviour of denying all available updates
> if there's one problem somewhere - kmods are pretty much unaffected by
> that because they're co-installed, not upgraded as usual so lagging
> behind a bit should not prevent any other updates.  And even if they
> would be affected, that's a problem in yum and needs to be fixed there,
> no?

And when the module isn't available at all for the new updated kernel?  You're 
not going to boot to that kernel, you'll continue running the bad kernel.  
It's pretty clear that in most cases, the 3rd party module isn't ready for 
mainstream use.  If it were, it'd be in the upstream kernel sources.  I 
firmly stand by if it isn't ready for upstream, it isn't ready for our 
userbase.  We're allowing for a poor level of end user experience when things 
break their module and their hardware.  It would be better off saying that we 
can't support their hardware in the mainstream AT ALL rather than create 
empty promises of support that die off the first time the kernel changes 
something that breaks the 3rd party module.  Upstream vendors for the most 
part won't be too eager to continually update their modules for a Fedora 
kernel.  I've been there and tried that.  RHEL kernels carry weight and get 
attention.  Fedora, not so much.

-- 
Jesse Keating
Release Engineer: Fedora
-------------- 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-advisory-board/attachments/20060920/a51d3b05/attachment.sig>