dkms for fc7?

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Matthias Saou schrieb:
> Neal Becker wrote :
>> I know there was some discussion about dkms for fedora.  It seemed (to me)
>> mostly positive.

Well, nobody ever proposed a "this is a detailed proposal how we could
use dkms for packaging kernel modules in Fedora that works like this
with our exisiting tools (yum, plague)". That would be a first step
someone would need to do afaics. Doing it now is much to late for F7 afaics.

And, btw, there is a lot of reluctance in general against packaging
kernel-modules in Fedora. Many people don't want them at all. I more and
more think we should have a separate repo for stuff like that *under*
the hood of the fedora-project and not enabled by default.

>>  Is there interest in pushing this forward for fc7?
> [...]
> 2) Fedora seems to be more interested in working on a long term
> solution for kernel modules,

The real long term solution IMHO can only be: get all kernel modules
into the upstream kernel. ;-) We IMHO should cooperate with at least
Opensuse and Ubuntu to put more pressure on the driver developers by not
including them in our main distro; that might convince them to submit
their stuff upstream . But that afaics would be a really hard task,
especially selling in to one of those two distros I named.

Anyway:

> having them cleanly available as rpm
> packages, instead of starting using dkms.

My 2 cent: Normal users should get modules pre-compiled as rpm package
(read: "we are not gentoo"). For enthusiasts something like dkms might
be a good idea. But I think most of us don't want to maintain two
codepaths for compiling kernel-modules, so we need to get both concepts
under one hood. E.g.: either use dkms in the buildsys, too, or find a
way to recompile the kmod srpm for new kernels automatically.

I hope we (Spot, mdomsch, Jon Masters, /me, maybe some others) can sit
down on the hackfest after fudon and work out a rough concept for the
future.

CU
thl