On Wed, Apr 30, 2014 at 11:40 PM, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
<marcelo.leitner(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Em 01-05-2014 00:14, Chuck Anderson escreveu:
> On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 05:04:05AM +0200, poma wrote:
>>
>>
>> There is a discrepancy in the terminology of these two packages:
>> - kernel-drivers[1]
>> - kernel-modules-extra
>>
>> Are these[1] modules passed the driving test?
>> Should I read the "Banana Split" thread, again?
>> Perhaps the "kernel-modules" for the "kernel-drivers" is the
proper name.
>
>
> I should have brought that up when the split was first proposed, but I
> agree and I do not like this inconsistency. The new one should be
> called kernel-modules, or the old kernel-modules-extra should be
> renamed kernel-drivers-extra.
Right. This kind of thing is why I let it sit for review for over a
month. Now it's live in Rawhide and doing a rename means you have to
get all the Provides/Obsoletes in place to kill off the old subpackage
name. In other words, it's a PITA.
Or, I may just do the rename and people that have the existing
subpackage installed can deal with it manually.
I vote for kernel-modules and kernel-modules-extra, as not all
modules are
drivers.
This is out for a vote.
josh