Re: kmod-nfts vs. kernel-module-ntfs

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Andrew D. Stadler wrote:

I recently updated my FC5 kernel to 2.6.17-1.2187 and decided to get the latest NTFS stuff to go with it.

I'm a bit confused because I see two different module names in use, seemingly all mixed together.

Here, <http://www.linux-ntfs.org/content/view/187>, I am offered a download of the file:

  kernel-module-ntfs-2.6.17-1.2187_FC5-2.1.27-0.rr.10.5.i686.rpm

But here, <http://rpm.livna.org/fedora/5/i386/>, I find

  kmod-ntfs-2.1.27-1.2.6.17_1.2187_FC5.i686.rpm

Finally, this page, <http://fedorasolved.org/post-install-solutions/ntfs/>, provides slightly different information as it says to use "kmod-ntfs" on FC5 and "kernel-module-ntfs" on FC4.


* Are these two different beasts, and if so what is the different? Or are they the same thing with two names, and why?


I tried it both ways: manual download/install as suggested by www.linux-ntfs.org, and yum-install as suggested by pretty much everyone else. Both worked.

* Is one or the other method preferable / recommended?

I also vote for livna.

Further, I strongly recommend all my users to install the livna repository:


# rpm -ivh http://rpm.livna.org/livna-release-5.rpm


And then limit yourself to core, updates, extras, and livna.

I keep a repo file for freshrpms, atrpms, jpackage, and others, but they are OFF by default. It is rare that I need anything that is not in the big 4. (jpackage for jedit)

The problem is, as is often discussed here, that those 4 repositories are using a common methodology for packaging, whereas the others may or may not for any given package. That spells trouble for package versioning, and will likely confuse yum later on.

Its a bit of a political mess in the Fedora repositories, and I really do not mean to draw any blood here. Apologies to maintainers that disagree with me. No offense intended. The 'other' repositories used to be way ahead of extras and livna, but those days have mostly passed. I happily acknowledge the hard work and dedication of all the maintainers, especially those who pioneered the way for us.


--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
[Index of Archives]     [Older Fedora Users]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Package Announce]     [EPEL Announce]     [Fedora Magazine]     [Fedora News]     [Fedora Summer Coding]     [Fedora Laptop]     [Fedora Cloud]     [Fedora Advisory Board]     [Fedora Education]     [Fedora Security]     [Fedora Scitech]     [Fedora Robotics]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Infrastructure]     [Fedora Websites]     [Anaconda Devel]     [Fedora Devel Java]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora Fonts]     [ATA RAID]     [Fedora Marketing]     [Fedora Management Tools]     [Fedora Mentors]     [SSH]     [Fedora Package Review]     [Fedora R Devel]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kickstart]     [Fedora Music]     [Fedora Packaging]     [Centos]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Fedora Legal]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora OCaml]     [Coolkey]     [Virtualization Tools]     [ET Management Tools]     [Yum Users]     [Tux]     [Yosemite News]     [Gnome Users]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Art]     [Fedora Docs]     [Asterisk PBX]     [Fedora Sparc]     [Fedora Universal Network Connector]     [Libvirt Users]     [Fedora ARM]

  Powered by Linux