On Fri, 2004-01-30 at 13:50, Alain TAUCH wrote: > On Fri, 30 Jan 2004 01:04:59 +0200 (EET) > Panu Matilainen [Panu] wrote: > > Panu> > I want my install to work on both UP and SMP machines, so I don't > Panu> > think adding kernel-smp as a dependency to the e1000 rpm is the > Panu> > right thing to do. > Panu> > > Panu> > Any way to do this? > Panu> > Panu> You should have a separate e1000 rpm for kernel and kernel-smp packages, > Panu> a module built for up kernel wont work anyway in smp kernel (and vice > Panu> versa) and then add dependency for the relevant kernel. > > I think stephen made a rpm with both modules, using postinstall > scripts to see wether kernel or kernel + kernel-smp were installed > and install his modules accordingly (this is how I do it). Sure it might be easier to create the package that way but it's simply not going to work without some special case hacks in anaconda :-/ > > It is much more easier to make a single rpm for all kernels and include > it in kickstart than trying to install a rpm for kernel, kernel-smp, > kernel-bigmem and so on ... > I don t feel comfortable adding kernel-module-xxx, kernel-module-smp-xxx, > kernel-module-bigmem-xxx in my comps and install them 'just in case'. > Moreover, dependencies may force the installation of all kernels, > which is not what we want. > > Not sure this is the right place to discuss about this but I wonder > how people used to do this. External kernel module packaging is hideously difficult, if not damn right impossible to get 100% right. Witness the endless discussions on the topic in the fedora-devel archives both at http://www.fedora.us/pipermail/fedora-devel/ and https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/ (sorry I don't have exact pointers to threads but Google will help you there) - Panu -
