On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 2:19 PM, Till Maas <opensource@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 22, 2011 at 01:21:40PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> We have considered it. A really long time ago. At that time, it was >> decided that we consider out-of-tree modules to be something we don't >> support, don't care about, and won't hold up updates for because of >> the aforementioned heavier considerations of fixing bugs. So, with >> that phrasing in mind, everything is compliant with what you're saying >> about the updates policy. > > Nevertheless it would have been nice to mention that the kernel update > will actually break the VirtualBox kernel module in it's update notes as > it seems to me that a lot of people knew it and even the problematic > change was mentioned in the update's feedback. Well, the kernel team isn't going to know whether an update breaks vbox (or vmware or whatever) or not, because we don't even attempt to see if it will. As I said above, we do not care about out of tree modules. So we could put 'this will break vbox' or 'this will break all out-of-tree modules' in every update but that may or may not be true. I believe having users note it in the feedback is sufficient. >> Maybe now this thread can end, because it's really not accomplishing >> anything at all. If we wanted to sit around and practice >> wordsmithing, there are much better places and topics to do it with. > > What about this suggestion by Josh Stone? This seems to be a good result > from the discussion: > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/2011-November/159818.html > | On 11/22/2011 09:51 AM, Michael Cronenworth wrote: > | > -#if LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(3, 1, 0) > | > | It may have be helpful for the faked 2.6.4x kernels to still present a > | 3ish LINUX_VERSION_CODE. AFAIK, faking the number is for the benefit of > | userspace, not any kernel module. Perhaps it's not too late? I'm not sure why we would go out of our way to make it easier to build out-of-tree modules. Bug reports with them loaded get closed immediately as NOTABUG or CANTFIX, but we still have to look at them before we can do that. Making it easier to build and use them just means more work for us. The bottom line on kernel modules in Fedora is very simple. If your module is not in the upstream kernel tree, and included in the set of modules we have enabled, we do not care at all about it. josh -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
