Attention kernel module project packagers!

[Panu Matilainen]

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006, Ralf Corsepius wrote:

> On Tue, 2006-08-15 at 10:08 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> On Tuesday 15 August 2006 09:52, Leszek Matok wrote:
>>> Isn't the "kmdls" system meant to be the cure to all of this? Is it even
>>> a hack? I don't even think the package names are truly ugly.
>>
>> I personally find having the kernel version embedded into the NAME of a
>> package is pretty damned ugly.  I find it ugly in the compat packages we
>> generate too, but that's a different story for a different day.
> Actually it's not a different story.
>
> It's the same story: Parallel installation.

Indeed - and to be exact: safely upgradable parallel installation.

We have for example libpng-1.2.8 and libpng10-1.0.18 in FC5. Rpm would 
allow installing them parallerly if they were just libpng-1.2.8 and 
libpng-1.0.18 so why do we rename it? To allow them to be upgraded 
separately, an alleged 'rpm -Uvh libpng-1.2.9' would remove both versions.

I haven't seen anybody arguing we should drop those compat packages and 
rely on yum plugin to deal with situations like the above correctly... so 
why are kernel modules any different?

 	- Panu -