I've created a wiki page outlining the kmdl design as well as showing
the flaws of the current kernel module scheme ("kmod"):
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AxelThimm/kmdls
It's focusing on the properties that are different in the two schemes
as such it is not a stand-alone specification.
The purpose of this write-up is to clarify the issues we're facing and
in light of this to stop further adoption of the current kernel module
scheme especially in GFS related parts in FC.
Please take some time to read it through, if I forgot some arguments I
will add them later to it. I would very much like to discuss it on
Thursday and vote on whether the kmod scheme should be blocked in
favour of adopting a kmdl scheme.
Beyond fedora-packaging's scope, e.g. hammering together a sane guide
for kernel modules, I'm willing to work with build infrastructure to
get the kmdl scheme firmly in place if this is approved and
ratified. I've done that in the past with ATrpms' buildsystem, so I
hope it will not be a too difficult task.
Furthermore I will work with upstream depsolver authors to get the
(trivial) kmdl support in all depsolvers. For yum and apt this can be
considered as already done, for smart I requested convenient hooks for
plugging in kmdl support which upstream already accepted. I will also
try to promote this scheme to the kmp/kerneldriver.org folks.
I think the kmdl scheme has a chance of becoming a wider-spread
standard that all rpm distros will benefit from.
Thanks.
--
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpL0nFLpjeZs.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
