On 05/24/2011 07:27 PM, Alexander Boström wrote: > mån 2011-05-23 klockan 15:15 +0100 skrev Gordan Bobic: > >> What I'm pondering now is something like a dkms package for the >> cryptodev kernel module, but I seem to remember reading somewhere that >> dkms is a non-Fedora RHEL thing. What do you guys think would be the >> best way to approach it, especially since we don't have "standard" >> kernels at the moment? > > It's probably a lot easier to just patch your kernel build (or ask > whoever builds your kernel to do it). Then you won't need kernel build > tools installed on your little arm device. I really don't think that's a big deal. Cryptodev module takes seconds to build, and even if you are building your own kernel, it means you can just install the new kernel, and the new module with automatically be built for it. So it still saves effort. > Anyway, you'll also need support in various libraries and applications, > which means that cryptodev.h must be available somewhere. The right > place to put that is probably glibc-devel or kernel-headers, but that's > not likely to happen until the support is in the mainline kernel. I was thinking about including it in the dkms-cryptodev package. After all, it is cryptodev module that brings it along. > I suggest you try to help get cryptodev upstreamed into kernel.org or > figure out why that hasn't happened. Once there's a solution in place > upstream it's a lot easier to let the code trickle down naturally into > all kernels and get support added to various related components. My experience on the lkml has been that it's pretty difficult to not get ignored. Perhaps somebody better established there might stand a better chance. Gordan _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
