[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Attention kernel module project packagers!



>>>>> "RD" == Rex Dieter <rdieter math unl edu> writes:

RD> In the hopes of furthering the discussion can we at least agree
RD> that the current kmod scheme works, at least to some people's
RD> perception of what that means. I hope, also, that we can agree
RD> that the current kmod scheme does have limitations/shortcomings.

RD> With that in mind, I think this (should) all boil down to the
RD> question: which weighs more heavily in your mind, the
RD> pain/suffering(*) of involved in 1. Adopting/changing-to a new
RD> (kmdl) standard 2. living with the limitations/shortcomings that
RD> come with using kmod. ?

Would the same problems that we have with kernel modules appear with
e.g. apache modules, if having two different apache versions installed
was possible?


/Benny



[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]