On Sun, Jul 23, 2006 at 07:31:46PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Tom 'spot' Callaway schrieb: > > [...] > > I'll defer to Thorsten and Axel on this one, since they've been knee > > deep in this. > > scop should be asked, too. He's probably knee deep (or even deeper) into > this, too. > > > If BOTH of you agree that the _ONLY_ way to have sane kernel > > module packages (without making rpm changes) is to overload Name, > > then I'll withdraw my objection to it. (I know Axel feels that > > way, do you Thorsten?) > > Well, I stick to my opinion that "uname -r" in Name creates some > problems on its own and not worth the trouble. But please be as fair as to admit that w/o uname-r in name the problems are several magnitudes worse. rpm -U/-i will nuke or overwrite kernel modules of the running kernel in a uname-r-less scheme. uname-r-in-name and the kmdl scheme isn't going to bring peace on earth, but it is already very close to the requirements on kernel module packages which no merging-versions-scheme can be. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgprYnvnV2C2e.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
