>>>> 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. I avoiding bringing that up originally as I didn't want to get into a discussion about the colour of the bike shed. > Or, I may just do the rename and people that have the existing > subpackage installed can deal with it manually. I would likely just do that, I've excluded kernels from my rawhide updates for the moment as I suspect it'd take a few days to settle out >> I vote for kernel-modules and kernel-modules-extra, as not all modules are >> drivers. > > This is out for a vote. Since it's now being discussed I vote for modules* Peter _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
