>>>>> "NM" == Nicolas Mailhot <nicolas.mailhot@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: NM> dkms sort of works for kernel levels out-of-tree drivers bother to NM> support finding a working combinaison of kernel & out-of-tree NM> driver versions quickly degenerates (even for big drivers like NM> nvidia) You make it sound as if dkms is somehow a loss when compared with other methods. The set of kernels that a specific dkms-enabled module package supports (i.e. many) is still significantly larger than the set of kernels supported by the other module packaging schemes (one). Maintainer effort and end-user frustration are reduced. It is not possible for them to be eliminated due to the nature of out-of-tree modules. As far as I can see, the only downside to dkms modules is the requirement for a build environment on the client machines. (Well, that and the lack of a set of packaging guidelines. The build environment requirement kept dkms out of consideration for Fedora Extras kernel modules, a decision which I still find completely mind boggling.) - J< -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
