kernel versionning problem

[Thomas M Steenholdt]

Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Tanguy Eric wrote:
>> Le mardi 23 janvier 2007 à 03:13 +0530, Rahul Sundaram a écrit :
>>> Tanguy Eric wrote:
>>>> I sent this message to fedora-list at redhat.com but i had no reaction 
>>>> so i
>>>> try also the devel one because i find this is problem we have to solve
>>>> for the core and extras merge, no ?
>>>>
>>>> I'm tired to have problems with rt2500 driver at each new fedora kernel
>>>> release because the versionning seems to not follow standards :
>>>> http://rt2x00.serialmonkey.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=2965
>>>>
>>>> What do you think about this ?
>>>>
>>>> Someone have similar problems with other modules ?
>>> This one is going all the way up to Linus since apparently he prefers 
>>> the current naming. See 
>>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee/Meeting-20070111 
>>> for the glorious details.
>>>
>>> Rahul
>>>
>> Ok but my problem is not really the kernel name but how a driver can
>> detect correctly the kernel version and eventually the backported patch
>> to compile fine ...
> 
> Yes. The name of the kernel is directly related to that issue.
> 
> Rahul
> 
Besides, of course, the fact that different distros, which even may use 
the same naming conventions, includes a batch of dissimilar patches and 
.config options.
Determining from a version-number alone, which of a few patch will apply 
cleanly to any non-vanilla kernel is virtually impossible.

/Thomas