Kernel Modules in Fedora -x

Todd Zullinger tmz at
Fri Aug 3 18:40:48 UTC 2007

Les Mikesell wrote:
> I thought RHEL made some effort to avoid breaking the 3rd party
> modules that their customers rely on with every kernel update (and
> that's probably a very large reason they have customers...) while
> Linus and fedora refuse to provide a stable interface.

The goal of Fedora is to be as close to upstream as possible - not to
have more customers^Wusers or win popularity contests.

RHEL has customers -- customers who pay good money so that Red Hat can
pay developers to spend time backporting things to maintain ABI.

Fedora has users -- users who get a very current open source OS at no

If you really need what RHEL provides, use RHEL or CentOS.  Why should
Fedora duplicate that?

>> One "bright" idea was to let Fedora come up with a way to make it
>> better.
> You mean - like actually define an interface and stick to it at
> least through a kernel major revision number?

Right, and have davej and the kernel team spend all of their time
backporting?  I'd rather have the kernel updated in a timely manner.
The place to argue for a stable interface is upstream.  Hasn't this
been said over and over before?

Todd        OpenPGP -> KeyID: 0xBEAF0CE3 | URL:
Start every day with a smile and get it over with.
    -- W.C. Fields

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 542 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list