Hi! The following is all nitpicking. I hope it won't cause a
bikeshedding discussion, I'm not going to fight for any of this, I just
want to get it of my chest.
On 25.11.22 11:09, Gerd Hoffmann wrote:
>>> So how about splitting 'kernel-core' into a modules and a kernel binary
>>> package? Like this:
>>>
>>> kernel-modules-core - the modules from current 'kernel-core'
>>> kernel-modules-standard - current 'kernel-modules' renamed (maybe
>>> skip rename, but I think it'll be less
>>> confusing that way).
>>> kernel-modules-{extra,internal} - no changes
I always found "internal" confusing, because it makes my head go
"internal to what? The Kernel?". Hence while we're reshuffling this, why
not make it more obvious what this package contains and call it
something like "kernel-modules-testing" or something like that?
>>> kernel-binary-bare - the kernel binary from current 'kernel-core'
>>> kernel-binary-uki-virt - unified kernel (same as 'kernel-unified-virt'
>>> in the test package repo).
Isn't the "binary" superfluous here (the modules are binaries, too)? Why
not call these packages "kernel-image" and "kernel-uki-virt"?
Just my 2 cent.
Ciao, Thorsten
_______________________________________________
kernel mailing list -- kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to kernel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
