On Fri, 2005-06-03 at 09:57 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
On 6/1/05, Elliot Lee <sopwith(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> Maybe it's time to start the brainstorming for Fedora Core 5 and Fedora
> Extras 5 - what major features are you willing to put effort into?
Now that dkms is in Extras... and fc4 has kernel modules in Core.
How about for fc5 we put dkms in Core and have the kernel modules in
Core use dkms to alleviate some of the sync issues we saw this time
around in rawhide.
DKMS doesn't solve the problem of the dependencies for the packages not
matching, so it feels to me like you're just trying to be a troll. But
I'll bite ;-)
As far as I'm concerned, DKMS solves the wrong problem. As long as the
user has to have a compiler installed to use it, it's not useful. As
long as it's not an integrated part of the packaging system, it's not
useful.
That said, I think that cleaning up the interaction for kernel module
packages and ensuring that everything is cleanly defined such that it
can work is a good goal for FC5 and I'm willing to help out some to make
it happen. Spot and I talked briefly about this in New Orleans and I
think the plan is to restart that discussion after he gets back from a
(much needed and deserved) vacation.
Once _that_ is defined, then we can think about buildsystem triggers to
ensure that the packages get rebuilt in a timely fashion and that the
tree thus stays sane.
Jeremy