On Fri, 2004-06-25 at 16:32, Jack Neely wrote: > > > > Several solutions have been floated on this list over the last few months. > > The one I personally like most is the concept that the openafs rpm, that was > > posted here the other week, uses. That solution has the quite big advantage > > of allowing users of this approach to make your modules for *all* released > > kernels in one go and in one package, and thus allowing the user to go back > > to older kernels without having to worry about an additional extra package > > needed for that. > > Another person also had a script to build modules automated, but done in a > > different way, so I would not call this an issue without solution at all. > > > > No. Including kernel headers in every single package that builds an > external module is *WRONG*. Not to mention the side effect of building, > say, openafs modules for, how many kernel errata does FC1 have now? surely someone can package it fully separate? I would actually prefer to build for all errata. There's only a dozen max or so per release... > I've talked with enough people and read enough emails and documentation > to understand that there is a pretty excepted standard for packaging > kernel modules. All the ones I've seen have problems with the "want to have multiple kernels and be able to go back and forth without pain" case. Oracle's OCFS does this similar (and auto-picks the right architecture out of it's archives of built modules) and that Just Works(tm). Users can go back and forth all they want, install older kernels, install other architectures of older kernels.. it Just Works(tm). > kernel-smp is merged into kernel well.... the problem here is that a significant number of x86 class machines don't boot the smp kernel....
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
