On Wed, 22 Dec 2004 07:50:13 -0500, Build System <buildsys(a)redhat.com> wrote:
New package GFS-kernel
GFS-kernel - The Global File System kernel modules
New package cman-kernel
cman-kernel - The Cluster Manager kernel modules
New package dlm-kernel
dlm-kernel - The Distributed Lock Manager kernel modules.
New package gnbd-kernel
gnbd-kernel - The kernel module for GFS's Network Block Device
My understanding is these package are pretty much the first packages
inside Fedora Core
to provide kernel modules outside the actual kernel package. I'm
looking at the package-naming and they don't follow the kernel module
package naming conventions at fedora.us or livna use to ease some of
the upgrade problems associated with stand-alone kernel modules. I'm
not qualified to comment as to whether or not the package in
development are going to have problems upgrading cleanly or not.. but
I don't think i've seen a discussion about the approach these packages
are taking constrasted to what the addon repositories have been doing.
I think we would all benefit if there was a discussion about a
consistent way to handle kernel-module packages inside and outside
I refer to the fedora.us package naming guidelines
but other 3rd party use similar naming schemes to deal with the
stand-alone kernel module issue
Are the standalone kernel module packages in development parallel installable?
Is yum and up2date as configured in the development tree prepared to
treat these packages as parallel installable?
If the FC packager has found a way to solve the problems the fedora.us
naming scheme tries to address, i think everyone would benifit by
seeing a discussion of the merits in the -devel-list sooner rather
than later, so we can have a consistent way to deal with kernel-module
packaging moving forward.