Axel Thimm schrieb: > On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 06:04:34PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> Toshio Kuratomi schrieb: >>> Apologies for posting into the wrong subthread of this monster, I >>> already deleted the relevant mail. >>> >>> If one of the major issues with the current kmod spec is that neither >>> rpm -U nor rpm -i work correctly, shouldn't that be corrected? If the >>> module could install into something like this: >>> /lib/modules/MODULE-VERSION-RELEASE/(KERNELVER|KABI)/MODULE.ko >>> >>> instead of: >>> /lib/modules/KERNELVER/extra/MODULE/MODULE.ko >>> >>> wouldn't that bring the behaviour of kmods inline with that of the >>> kernel? (Use rpm -i for normal operations, rpm -U if you don't believe >>> in Murphy). >> I like that idea -- especially when combined with the the kabi stuff. >> Yes, someone still could run "rpm -Uvh" and would loose older kmods, but >> yum and apt would do the right thing. > > Why would suddenly yum/apt work better? Because /lib/modules/MODULE-VERSION-RELEASE/(KERNELVER|KABI)/MODULE.ko avoids that there are ever file conflicts between packages so yum will always be able to install the new module (just like the kernel -- you can of course still do rpm -Uvh manually, but I don't care because that's possible with the kernel, too). CU thl -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
