Kernel Modules in Fedora -x

Rahul Sundaram sundaram at
Tue Aug 7 22:23:07 UTC 2007

Les Mikesell wrote:
> I'm not suggesting that fedora modifies the ABI arbitrarily just to 
> encourage users to switch to RHEL, but if there is there is no 
> expectation that 3rd party drivers that work at the beginning of a 
> version will work after the first update, I think that should be stated 
> more clearly.

There is no expectation that any software outside of Fedora repositories 
can really be supported by anyone within the project. This is just 
common sense. The fact that we are going to be close to upstream and not 
consider proprietary kernel modules is clearly stated in the objectives 
page.  The front page of and overview is clear about 
the focus on Free and open source software. \
> The change that broke things was never pushed into the Centosplus 
> version I ended up using.  

That is because they are just rebuilding the RHEL kernel and RHEL kernel 
team does the backporting work to remain on pretty much the same kernel. 
Again Fedora does have that kind of resources nor does match the goal of 
Fedora. If you want and prefer RHEL or rebuilds just continue using that 

If fedora must send every new and untested
> change on to the users, how about some easier way to avoid them if they 
> break your hardware, like making kernel updates opt-in within a release 
> version? 

Fedora is targeted towards the end users who prefer running close to the 
latest versions. These are not untested nor is every version in all 
packages pushed into the stable branches. All updates are opt-in anyway. 
  So if the older version works for you, you don't have to update.


More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list