On Wednesday 20 September 2006 12:19, Ville Skyttä wrote: > If you're referring to yum's behaviour of denying all available updates > if there's one problem somewhere - kmods are pretty much unaffected by > that because they're co-installed, not upgraded as usual so lagging > behind a bit should not prevent any other updates. And even if they > would be affected, that's a problem in yum and needs to be fixed there, > no? And when the module isn't available at all for the new updated kernel? You're not going to boot to that kernel, you'll continue running the bad kernel. It's pretty clear that in most cases, the 3rd party module isn't ready for mainstream use. If it were, it'd be in the upstream kernel sources. I firmly stand by if it isn't ready for upstream, it isn't ready for our userbase. We're allowing for a poor level of end user experience when things break their module and their hardware. It would be better off saying that we can't support their hardware in the mainstream AT ALL rather than create empty promises of support that die off the first time the kernel changes something that breaks the 3rd party module. Upstream vendors for the most part won't be too eager to continually update their modules for a Fedora kernel. I've been there and tried that. RHEL kernels carry weight and get attention. Fedora, not so much. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgpVl7Gm08vbg.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly
