I this this whole thread just echoed the fact that we need to evaluate how kernels get installed and updated. The current solution works, but is tenuous at best and can break systems. We need a better way, possibly have a way for rpm to link to other rpm's so that yum understands that you are now dealing with a situation where updating one without the other could be a problem. I could see that feature benefit other parts of the system where tight coupling between two packages could take place. The other issue that yum needs to address at some point is security updates vs everything else. I may wish to only take updates that close actual or theoretical security issues and right now I would have to sift through every package that needs updating to see if that is the case. Cheers, Eric Chris Adams wrote: >Once upon a time, Jason L Tibbitts III <tibbs@xxxxxxxxxxx> said: > > >>Only if you use DKMS as is. But if you take it as a starting point >>(i.e. what Mr. Rugolsky suggested) and make its output not an >>installed module but a kernel-module-whatever RPM then end users >>wouldn't need the development packages. >> >> > >Someone can build and distribute kernel module RPMs today; they don't >need DKMS for that. DKMS is a way for someone to distribute source so >that users don't have to care that they updated to a new kernel. If >they still have to download an RPM for the updated module, then nothing >has changed. > > >
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
