On Sunday 23 July 2006 14:12, Axel Thimm wrote: > Well, add to the above that the kABI isn't going to give you an > orderable single entry like uname-r does (but maybe noone cares, the > kernel module packaging at least wouldn't), and that no user will > understand the mapping between his kernel, whose uname -r he knows, > and a kABI checksum. > > But in principle if one day kABI checksums gain a popularity/visibilty > like uname-r has today on the user's side, then I agree, that uname-r > in the name could be replaced with a kABI checksum. In the kmdl scheme > this would be a rather trivial change. Perhaps I fail to see the problem. Once you have an ABI to use for requires and such, can't you use someting more simple in the version or release rather than a uname-r in the name? -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora
Attachment:
pgpERaQnCrLN1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
