On 8/3/07, Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)jdub.homelinux.org> wrote:
By source RPMs I didn't mean .src.rpm. I meant the payload that
is
installed from dkms-foo-mod is the source of the module that you want
DKMS to build. I think we're saying the same thing.
And I am more and more starting to think this might be a _good_
idea.
Users that want modules we aren't willing to carry upstream can install
the dkms "payload" (as you described it) for the module, build and
install.
We might also want to think about enabling optional magic in something
like /sbin/new-kernel-pkg for systems with dkms configured to attempt
dkms payload rebuilds on new kernel installs.
If we do not even attempt to provide the binary module against a
kernel, we avoid the never-ending game of catch-up that we have to
play in the build system with traditional kmod packages when a new
kernel is pushed. And I think it sends a clear message that these
things are more experimental in nature.
Some might think this is too technical a hurdle for users to clear, but
I think it might be worth examining. Care to draft a proposal for
FESCo? We could evaluate it at the same time we do dwmw2/f13's.
I should be able to draft a proposal. When's the next meeting?
-jef