On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 06:41 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Wed, 2006-08-16 at 23:23 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > > So perhaps we could approach this issue from the other direction: what > > NEVR convention(s) and file locations are required so that rpm, yum > > and the like will properly handle the modules, including parallel > > installs without conflict? What do the spec(s) need to have so that > > the buildsys can build them for all supported kernel versions and > > variants? > Fully agreed, sounds very reasonable to me. I think this pretty much just another way of saying the same thing I posted in https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-packaging/2006-August/msg00170.html : focus on the only real technical design issue now, and just reuse the implementation work which is already done as much as possible. Also, the packaging draft linked to in the above message and the current "standard" doc from which it is derived from should already contain all the above info. Maybe it just needs some restructuring and clarifications in order to prominently specify what part of it is the interface and what is the supporting reference implementation that makes it possible to ship such packages with the current infrastructure. -- Fedora-packaging mailing list Fedora-packaging@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-packaging
