[Fedora-packaging] Re: Mail voting on kmdl adoption

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Tom 'spot' Callaway schrieb:
> On Sat, 2006-08-12 at 17:18 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
>
> So far, the only technical reason that I've heard mentioned here against
> adding kver to Name is that it would make debuginfo more complicated for
> kmod packages (and I believe that someone posted a workaround method).

You forgot the biggest "issue" (note the quotes): All the depsolvers 
would need special handling to install kmods for newly installed 
kernels. That works out of the box with the current scheme and IMHO is 
an important advantage of the current standard. Yes, there exists a 
yum-plugin already that handles it. But we would need something for 
up2date/RHEL5 too in case the ABI breaks -- I suspect that's to late.

> In fact, I suspect that kmodtool could even include the necessary magic.

Sure, that would be possible. But we'll hit other problems after this 
major scheme change. We probably hit some in the old livna days, but I 
forget most of them already (sorry -- maybe I can skip though bugzilla 
to fresh up my mind). But I think sticking to the current scheme and 
solving the "install-conflicts" problem together with the kabi stuff 
would be the better idea.

CU
thl