Hans de Goede wrote:
Josh Boyer wrote:
I'd like to just do a brief poll here just to see how many are yay or
nay for kmods. And I'm not talking about their current implementation
or the other various ways that the idea can be accomplished, but rather
on the idea of having kernel modules as separate packages in general.
If you're against the general idea and want to follow up with reasons
why that's fine. I just want to avoid implementation discussions at the
moment if possible.
I'm not sure where I stand, on one hand I would love to see something
like the UVC driver to be in a kmod until merged upstream, to add
support for recent webcams.
OTOH, maintaining kmods and especially keeping the repo depsolving 100%
with them may be a pain.
I think that atleast we need a rule that if it isn't heading upstream,
there need to be real good reasons to have it in Fedora, if it is
heading upstream I think providing a kmod for a while as a service might
be a good idea.
Does anyone know for example why the lirc kernel module
Modules. There are a TON of 'em.
has never gone upstream?
Christoph Bartelmus seemed to have very little interest in getting
things upstream, but *just* posted a "Help Wanted" email to the lirc
mailing list on the 16th. Excerpted from that:
----8<----
3. kernel module clean-up: the final goal should be a kernel
integration, but there a several fine-grain steps inbetween, like
correct usage of __init, __exit, remove all compile time dependancies,
enable support for more than one serial port at a time in lirc_serial,
remove 2.4 compatibility code, etc.
----8<----
--
Jarod Wilson
jwilson@xxxxxxxxxx
_______________________________________________
Fedora-kernel-list mailing list
Fedora-kernel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-kernel-list
