[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [Fedora-packaging] Re: atrpms kernel modules

Axel Thimm schrieb:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2006 at 07:40:38PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> Axel Thimm schrieb:
>>> rpm for one can't cope with it. Suppose you have two active kernels
>>> (say 2.6.16 and 2.6.17 or xen0 and non-xen0 etc.) and already have
>>> foo-kmdl for both in version 1. Now foo-kmdl in version 2 is
>>> released. Both rpm -i (coinstall, no replacement of of foo-kmdl for
>>> the same kernel) and rpm -U (remove all foo-kmdl but the highest one,
>>> e.g. at least one kernel stay w/o any kmdl) won't work.
>> Well, yes, coinstall will fail because this would result in a file
>> conflict. But rpm -U works fine (but removes the older version) with the
>> current Extras kmod scheme and "yum install foo" AFAICS works fine, too.
> No, rpm -U would remove both kernel modules from both kernels and only
> install the selected kernel module, you end up with one kernel losing
> the kernel module w/o replacement.
> rpm -U will always leave only one kernel module package behind unless
> these packages are disambiguated in their name by extending the name
> to contain the kernel's uname -r.

I don't want to reply to the other aspects of this mail -- I don't think
it makes to much sense now and prefer to wait for the docs from Axel.
But it seems we talked pass each other in above section so I'll try to
give an example to show the behavior with the current Extras scheme
(note this is not tested, only written down how it works afaik):

$ rpm -q kernel
$ rpm -qa kmod-ntfs*

kmod-ntfs{,-smp,xen0,...}-2.1.27- show up in the repo
and user runs yum update. After that:

$ rpm -qa kmod-ntfs*

E.g. yes, kmod-ntfs-2.1.27- got removed. No, both the
up and the smp-kernel still have their modules.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]