[Fedora-packaging] Kernel Module Packages

Jeff Spaleta jspaleta at gmail.com
Thu Aug 18 21:52:41 UTC 2005

On 8/18/05, Jack Neely <jjneely at pams.ncsu.edu> wrote:
> If we want kernel module packages to be successful they can't be that
> complex for the packager.  Are there lots of special cases?  You bet.
> Let the special cases be handled once in Yum code.  Let the other
> special cases be handled once in Plague.  Otherwise, each packager will
> do things ever so slightly different which leads to breakage.  Not to
> mention how tired we will be of correcting and explaining.

I'm just trying to get this conversation moving forward again by
making sure everyone is aware of where the current implementation
stands.  This particular issue  seems to be forever stalled in a
debate over where to start.. policy or tools.  I'd hate to see this
conversation frustrated further by an inaccurate accessment of current
reality.  If packagers provided "kernel-modules" the current magic in
yum would work pretty well for most of the situations an end-user
would care about.  What are the real hold ups here... why isn't it
good enough to make a policy decision that all Core and Extras module
packages provide "kernel-modules" and be named
"kernel-module-whatever" as a starting point to get some packages out?


More information about the Fedora-packaging mailing list