[ATrpms-devel] Re: Changing foo-kmdl- to kernel-module-foo-? (was:
pmatilai at welho.com
Thu May 6 13:41:03 CEST 2004
On Thu, 6 May 2004, Axel Thimm wrote:
> some of you may be aware of the thread below. To summarize Dag
> explicitely broke compatibility with ATrpms in order to enforce his
> kernel naming and versioning semantics. This is not nice.
> Anyway, independent of blackmailing attempts, how do you feel about
> changing the foo-kmdl- string to kernel-module-foo-? There are
> drawbacks like
> o ATrpms userbase has gotten accustomed to the kmdl naming
> o kernel-module-foo-<kernel version/release>-<foo version/release>
> is non-intuitive and doesn't sort next to foo in guis like synaptic.
> The pros are, that this scheme is supported by Panu Matilainen, the
> Red Hat/Fedora apt guru (cced). Supported means that kernel upgrades
> automatically perform kernel module upgrades.
Purely from technical point of view: there's no reason why the -kmdl-
naming couldn't be supported by apt as well, the biggest obstacle to
that in the current naming is that -smp (and -bigmem, dunno if there are
any of those) is moved away from the 'uname -r' part.
Not saying it wouldn't be possible to handle that as well but the needed
"Lua-magic" is already hideous enough of a naming-hack as it is, it'd
rather avoid the guess-munge-guess-cut-guess-paste procedure :)
So.. unless I have missed something but it'd seem that just by changing
the naming from
..would make it trivial to support this with the same Lua-script which
fedora.us apt uses. The only other issue I see is that the -kmdl- packages
still have "provides: kernel-module-foo" which IS going to confuse the
Lua-magic, IF you want to simultaneuosly use kernel-module-foo packages
from other repositories automatically.
- Panu -
More information about the atrpms-devel