[Fedora-packaging] kernel-module-proposal 2 and yum: some tests

[seth vidal]

> If anybody else has ideas what also could or should be tested send a
> mail and I'll add it.
> 
> #######################
> Adding a repo with
> 
> > ndiswrapper-1.1-1.i386.rpm
> > kernel-module-ndiswrapper-1.1-1.2.6.11_1.1369_FC4.i686.rpm     
> > kernel-module-ndiswrapper-1.1-1.2.6.11_1.1369_FC4smp.i686.rpm 
> 
> in it and typing 
> 
> ># yum --disablerepo=updates-released --enablerepo=step_1 install 'kernel-module-ndiswrapper'
> 
> will result in:
> 
> > [...]
> > Dependencies Resolved
> > 
> > =============================================================================
> > Package                 Arch       Version          Repository
> > Size
> > =============================================================================
> > Installing:
> > kernel-module-ndiswrapper  i686       1.1-1.2.6.11_1.1369_FC4smp
> > step_1            3.3 k
> > Installing for dependencies:
> > kernel-smp              i686       2.6.11-1.1369_FC4  base
> > 13 M
> > ndiswrapper             i386       1.1-1            step_1
> > 22 k
> > 
> > Transaction Summary
> > =============================================================================
> > Install      3 Package(s)his
> > [...]
> 
> Seems yum prefers to install the kernel-module for the smp kernel and
> therefor also installs that kernel even when a UP-Kernel is installed
> already. Not very nice :-( 

how should yum have known which of those two you wanted? what are the
clues it should use to know which of those to install? They're both
named the same thing.



> #######################
> Nearly the same problem as above happened when I used 
> 
> ># yum --disablerepo=updates-released --enablerepo=step_1 ndiswrapper
> 
> > [...]
> > Dependencies Resolved
> > 
> > =============================================================================
> > Package                 Arch       Version          Repository
> > Size
> > =============================================================================
> > Installing:
> > ndiswrapper             i386       1.1-1            step_1
> > 22 k
> > Installing for dependencies:
> > kernel-module-ndiswrapper  i686       1.1-1.2.6.11_1.1369_FC4smp
> > step_1            3.3 k
> > kernel-smp              i686       2.6.11-1.1369_FC4  base
> > 13 M
> > 
> > Transaction Summary
> > =============================================================================
> > Install      3 Package(s)
> > [...]
> > 
> 
> #######################
> Okay, next test; Both UP- and SMP-Kernel are installed now (as it
> normally is the case on SMP-Systems). typing
> 
> > # yum --disablerepo=updates-released --enablerepo=step_1 install 'kernel-module-ndiswrapper'
> or
> > # yum --disablerepo=updates-released --enablerepo=step_1 ndiswrapper
> will result in something like this:
> 
> > [...]
> > Dependencies Resolved
> > 
> > =============================================================================
> > Package                 Arch       Version          Repository
> > Size
> > =============================================================================
> > Installing:
> > kernel-module-ndiswrapper  i686       1.1-1.2.6.11_1.1369_FC4smp
> > step_1            3.3 k
> > Installing for dependencies:
> > ndiswrapper             i386       1.1-1            step_1
> > 22 k
> > 
> > Transaction Summary
> > =============================================================================
> > Install      2 Package(s)
> > [...]
> 
> In and ideal world yum would install modules for both up and smp in that
> case.

okay but HOW can it know? You've described what you see as problem but
you haven't described any way yum can know about what's you think
_should_ be going on.

> Note: The problems described up until here probably can happen with the
> naming schemes currently used by Livna (where uname is in the name of
> the package, e.g.
> kernel-module-ndiswrapper-2.6.11_1.1369_FC4smp-1.1-1.i686.rpm), too. We
> had some of those problems in the past.
> 
> #######################
> Next test (only with SMP-kernel): New Ndiswrapper-Version. This is in
> the repo now:
> 
> > kernel-module-ndiswrapper-1.1-1.2.6.11_1.1369_FC4.i686.rpm
> > kernel-module-ndiswrapper-1.1-1.2.6.11_1.1369_FC4smp.i686.rpm
> > kernel-module-ndiswrapper-1.1-2.2.6.11_1.1369_FC4.i686.rpm
> > kernel-module-ndiswrapper-1.1-2.2.6.11_1.1369_FC4smp.i686.rpm
> > ndiswrapper-1.1-1.i386.rpm
> > ndiswrapper-1.1-2.i386.rpm
> 
> Works now! Did not with older yum version. Problem was: kernel-modules
> normally are installed, not updated. But in this case the pgk needs to
> be updated cause the files in the package would conflict otherwise.

is this item marked as provided 'kernel-module'?





> Yum installs the new kernel, new ndiswrapper and new
> kernel-module-ndiswrapper (as it should). But here we hit a problem with
> our proposal. Older kernel-module-versions stay installed, but they
> probably won't work with the new ndiswrapper-utils-package (maybe not in
> the case of ndiswrapper, but ati-fglrx, nvidia-glx, qemu and other pkg.
> likely will have this problem). I thought a Obsoletes in the
> kernel-module-ndiswraper.spec like the following might help:
> 

so you think yum should remove other, older kernel modules even though
it doesn't have the info available to know to do that?

> But huuuh, why are they still installed? afterwards?

I'm not sure I understand the case you're describing here.


the biggest problem with the kernel-module packaging discussion is that
all of the solutions y'all have come up with have been excruciatingly
complex. We've discussed them on the yum-devel list and the result is
'ugh, these are painful' both to implement the code for and to develop
the packages themselves. I'm not sure any solution will match up to
everyone's concept of 'correct'.

-sv