[Fedora-packaging] get further rid of uname -r in the kmod stuff and solve the remaining kmod problem

[Jack Neely]

On Mon, Aug 14, 2006 at 07:57:17PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Monday 14 August 2006 16:11, Jack Neely wrote:
> > > Well, normally it's a "install transaction" but when there is a
> > > potential file conflict it's changed to a "upgrade transaction" afaik --
> > > and that will remove the old kmod as well because both old kmods have
> > > the same packagename.
> >
> > This is not correct.  The current implentation will install the new
> > module and add an erase transaction element for the old module requiring
> > the same kernel.  
> 
> Wait, stop the presses.
> 
> Isn't this the "root" of the problem that Axel is complaining about, that the 
> kmod version of doing things will cause old modules for old kernels to get 
> removed?  If this isn't the case, then why are we talking about replacing the 
> current standard?
> 
> -- 
> Jesse Keating
> Release Engineer: Fedora

The fedorakmod.py implementation only removes old kernel modules when
you have upgraded the kernel module within the same kernel version.
Otherwise the packages would have file conflicts.

So if you have installed:

kmod-foo-1.2.2.6.17-1.2157_FC5
kmod-foo-1.2.2.6.17-1.2158_FC5
kmod-foo-1.2.2.6.17-1.2159_FC5

and Yum has kmod-foo-5.2.2.6.17-1.2158_FC5 in the repo you wind up with
the following set installed:

kmod-foo-1.2.2.6.17-1.2157_FC5
kmod-foo-5.2.2.6.17-1.2158_FC5
kmod-foo-1.2.2.6.17-1.2159_FC5

as kmod-foo-1.2.2.6.17-1.2158_FC5 and kmod-foo-5.2.2.6.17-1.2158_FC5
contain the same file paths.  This is nicely solved by kabi.

Jack

> --
> Fedora-packaging mailing list
> Fedora-packaging at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging


-- 
Jack Neely <jjneely at ncsu.edu>
Campus Linux Services Project Lead
Information Technology Division, NC State University
GPG Fingerprint: 1917 5AC1 E828 9337 7AA4  EA6B 213B 765F 3B6A 5B89