On 8/18/05, Jack Neely <jjneely@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > If we want kernel module packages to be successful they can't be that > complex for the packager. Are there lots of special cases? You bet. > Let the special cases be handled once in Yum code. Let the other > special cases be handled once in Plague. Otherwise, each packager will > do things ever so slightly different which leads to breakage. Not to > mention how tired we will be of correcting and explaining. I'm just trying to get this conversation moving forward again by making sure everyone is aware of where the current implementation stands. This particular issue seems to be forever stalled in a debate over where to start.. policy or tools. I'd hate to see this conversation frustrated further by an inaccurate accessment of current reality. If packagers provided "kernel-modules" the current magic in yum would work pretty well for most of the situations an end-user would care about. What are the real hold ups here... why isn't it good enough to make a policy decision that all Core and Extras module packages provide "kernel-modules" and be named "kernel-module-whatever" as a starting point to get some packages out? -jef -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
