On Mon, Feb 21, 2005 at 02:48:40PM -0500, seth vidal wrote: > Right now I'm thinking: > kernel modules must have kernel-version-release in the package name for > the kernel module - this makes for irritating package naming and cvs > naming but <shrug> > > if a kernel-module has a new version available then it should be > updated, not installed. > else - kernel modules are installed. I think that adding the kernel version-release to the package name of the kernel-module-foo packages is a bad idea. I think it would be better to have the kernel-module-foo actual version-release tag be the same as the corresponding kernel version-release tag. Then you could just parallel install the kernel-module-foo packages in the same way that the kernel is parallel installed. > Now - how do we go about getting kernel modules pulled in when new > kernels come out. Clearly it can't be via an update b/c the package name > will change, so yum won't notice it as an update. Doing it via obsoletes > is just yucky. We need something like a kernel-module registry. So we > can track kernel-modules you have installed by something OTHER than > package name. Using a package name that never changes would avoid this problem... Of course, then we have a problem if you want to update a kernel module without updating the corresponding kernel package. Would this happen that often?
