El mar, 01-03-2005 a las 18:10 -0500, David Zeuthen escribió:
> On Tue, 2005-03-01 at 23:56 +0100, Fernando Herrera wrote:
> > Then, if we cannot stop breaking this modules we should think about
> >creating a little graphical tool for compiling/recompiling external
> >kernel modules (maybe a magic app and ugly application finding
> >makefiles, or some special file, dunno).
>
> Users can't, won't and shouldn't have to understand things like this.
Agree. I was thinking in some autopackage module/tool or so, just
automagically invoked after the kernel update and saying ("we are
updating your system: WebCam XXY driver....[===== ]")
> >But if Sally bought a webcam
> >that is not supported by the standard kernel, should we say to her
> >"Don't use linux, use Windows"?
> >
>
> Can someone explain to me why this is not a package management problem?
a) 3rd party Open Source kernel module maintainers cannot manage so many
packages for so many distributions.
b) That woudn't be inmediate. If Sally up2date magics update her kernel
and she has to wait 4 days to get his webcam back working is a bad user
experience.
Salu2
