On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 07:16:59PM +0200, Zeeshan Ali (Khattak) wrote: > On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 6:54 PM, Christophe Fergeau <cfergeau@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'm still not fully convinced that we really need all this 'format' API in > > the first place, pre/post install drivers and install scripts are all > > listed in an <os> node, if an install script for a given OS does not > > support a driver format, why is it listed in the first place in the <os> > > node? > > I just wanted to support the case of providing information about > drivers even if our autoinstallation script does not support them. > Having said that I'm not sure such information would be of any use to > the apps. No strong opinions so I'll let you decide if its needed or > not. At worse (ie if in the future we add an install script that does not support one driver we list), applications will try to use the driver, but this will fail, right? I guess when we get to such a situation, we can look into adding this API, but that for now having it is not required. Correct me if I'm missing something :) Christophe
Attachment:
pgpa4KnYcks3L.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Libosinfo mailing list Libosinfo@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libosinfo
