On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 15:41 -0500, Chuck R. Anderson wrote: >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. Give me an example for both cases (the case you don't like and the case that you do)? >Using a package name that never changes would avoid this problem... Package name? Or package version? These things exist to identify the package, not so we can work around gaps in our infrastructure. >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? Assume it will. :) ~spot --- Tom "spot" Callaway: Red Hat Sales Engineer || GPG Fingerprint: 93054260 Fedora Extras Steering Committee Member (RPM Standards and Practices) Aurora Linux Project Leader: http://auroralinux.org Lemurs, llamas, and sparcs, oh my!
