[Fedora-packaging] Re: kernel-module packaging discussing broken into pieces: One specfile approach vs. splitted spec file

[Ville Skyttä]

On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 09:12 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 07:47:41AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > >FE is em8300. Where is his "xen" flavour?
> > 
> > You'd have to ask scop. Maybe it didn't build, don't know.
> 
> If it builds for xen0 it builds for xen.

I'm not aware of any problems building it, but nor am I knowledgeable
enough about Xen to be able to tell whether shipping this particular
module package for the FC5 "xen" variant makes sense in the first place
even if it compiles fine.  So I just followed what GFS and friends do
and didn't build for "xen".  Maybe that's a bug?

Some info about the different xen variants from the POV of for which of
them in general it makes sense to ship hardware device drivers such as
this one would be nice.  WAG: xen0 and xen yes, xenU no?  And if the
module is not a hardware device driver but something else, then in
general ship+build for all xen*?