On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Em 01-05-2014 00:14, Chuck Anderson escreveu: > >> On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 05:04:05AM +0200, poma wrote: >>> >>> >>> There is a discrepancy in the terminology of these two packages: >>> - kernel-drivers[1] >>> - kernel-modules-extra >>> >>> Are these[1] modules passed the driving test? >>> Should I read the "Banana Split" thread, again? >>> Perhaps the "kernel-modules" for the "kernel-drivers" is the proper name. >> >> >> I should have brought that up when the split was first proposed, but I >> agree and I do not like this inconsistency. The new one should be >> called kernel-modules, or the old kernel-modules-extra should be >> renamed kernel-drivers-extra. Right. This kind of thing is why I let it sit for review for over a month. Now it's live in Rawhide and doing a rename means you have to get all the Provides/Obsoletes in place to kill off the old subpackage name. In other words, it's a PITA. Or, I may just do the rename and people that have the existing subpackage installed can deal with it manually. > I vote for kernel-modules and kernel-modules-extra, as not all modules are > drivers. This is out for a vote. josh _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
