On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 23:11 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On Mon, 2006-08-14 at 15:58 -0400, Jack Neely wrote: > > > Again, show me how kmdl scales. A university/enterprise environment is > > not a 3rd party extras repository. > > I pointed out earlier in this thread that we've used a scheme similar to > kmdl at work (speaking of thousands of systems here) rather successfully > for several years. And like I stated previously as well, this is just > for the record, I'm not arguing for either scheme. > > It's not kmdl or kmod that scales, it's the processes for releasing > kernel modules and the depsolver+plugin to handle them which need to > "scale": a plugin can be smart enough to skip the kernel update if no > corresponding kernel module for the new version can be found, or abort > the entire update. But you'll need plugins for both schemes to catch the > situation where somehow a new kernel slipped out without having kernel > modules for it available, otherwise you can end up with unbootable > system. > monkey-wrench question: what happens if both versions of a kernel module work on the available kernel but work with different versions of the userland tools? -sv -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
