On Tue, Apr 29, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Miloslav Trmač <mitr@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > 2014-04-29 17:40 GMT+02:00 Lennart Poettering <mzerqung@xxxxxxxxxxx>: >> >> On Tue, 29.04.14 16:58, Alexander Larsson (alexl@xxxxxxxxxx) wrote: >> > Its around 15 megs or so, although on rhel7 its 20 megs larger because >> > of a dependency that kmod has on /usr/bin/nm (binutils) that doesn't >> > seem to be there on fedora kmod. This seems like a bug in fedora though, >> > as kmod ships /usr/sbin/weak-modules which calls nm, so once fixed >> > fedora would be at 35 meg too. >> >> I am pretty sure that the weak-modules thing should just go. It's >> outdated cruft, for some enterprise thing, and inused in Fedora. > > > That "outdated cruft" is AFAICS still part of the RHEL-7 ABI design. > Assuming the same people will end up maintaining it whether it is in Fedora > or RHEL-7, I can't see that work going away, though whether to maintain it > "upstream" in Fedora or as a RHEL-only patch is basically up to the > individual maintainers. Fedora does not, and will not, support the kABI mechanism that is present in the RHEL kernel package. It doesn't make sense in Fedora at all. So "maintaining" weak-modules in Fedora is pretty limited. You can't test what can't be used, as evident by it not even having the proper deps. josh -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
