ATrpms' kernel modules (kmdls)

Tim Lauridsen tla-ml at
Wed Apr 26 13:11:02 UTC 2006

Axel Thimm wrote:
> Hi,
> where is the right place to discuss kernel modules, this list?
> I know most people are weared out on the subject, and probably don't
> want to hear about it anymore. Still, ATrpms has a bunchful of useful
> kernel modules that would fit in very well.
> The dilemma is, that the methology used at ATrpms differs in some
> fundamental design parts from what is the current proposal, mostly the
> one spec/src.rpm for both userland and kmdl builds and simple
> unprepared upstream Sources:, and further derived concept
> bits.
> ATrpms' concept also supports RHEL3 and earlier FCs and even RHL
> releases (e.g. not dependending on availability of kernel-devel which
> doesn't exist for these distributions).
> So my options are
> o convince people about adopting ATrpms' methology
>   good: field-proven, easy maintenance, many users already accustomed
> 	to kmdls, works on RHEL3 and legacy, too
>   bad: Thorsten has put a lot of work in the current proposal,
>        different buildsystem adaption, danger of endless discussions
> o fork packages (RHEL3 and legacy in ATrpms, other here)
>   good: all the bad above reversed
>   bad: double maintain them
> o do nothing
>   good: no work ;)
>   bad: no packages :/
> Maybe a compromise may look like
> o Allow ATrpms' methology to enter the system
> o Allow kmdls to get submitted/reviewed
> o Modify the methology w/o breaking RHEL3/legacy stuff and w/o
>   breaking the user's interfacing (but potentially break the
>   packagers' interface if a better macro system is developed)
> e.g. if the basic properties of the kmdl system are acceptable (mostly
> the one src.rpm with upstream sources for all builds), then let's get
> it into the system to start improving it.

I not a kernel module packager, so i can't comment on the methology, but 
from a user perspective the most important feature is automatic updating 
of kernel-modules when new versions of the kernel is installed by yum, 
this is working great with the madwifi,ntfs,nvidia drivers in the livna  
fc5 repository. if kmdls can be used in the same way, then fine with me 
for a users perspective.

There have been a lot of FUD about ATrpms, lets forget about that and  
make some packages for people. Keep up the good work Axel.


More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list