Kernel package and modules
andy at openmoko.com
Mon Aug 4 10:34:40 CEST 2008
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Somebody in the thread at some point said:
| On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 09:26:52 +0100
| Andy Green <andy at openmoko.com> wrote:
|> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
|> Hash: SHA1
|> Hi -
|> The combination of us moving some important functionality to a module,
|> and the finegrained module packaging we currently use have made a
|> problem for users.
|> I would like to propose we radically simplify how we deal with
|> modules, simply by pushing all the ones we create into the main
|> kernel package. This has one disadvantage, size on storage, but
|> critical advantages like guaranteeing you won't lack a module package
|> and definitely the module packages will be the correct version for
|> the monolithic kernel. Nor do most users want to be involved in
|> packaging decisions down to the extent of individual modules,
|> especially when they don't have anything that lists them as a
|> Considering we have 256MB / compressed by default I don't think the
|> size drawback is really an issue.
|> What do the folks who handle this packaging think about this proposal?
| Or we could just RRECOMEND kernel-modules which will drag in all
| modules. See we are ahead.
What is "kernel-modules" then, a metapackage for all modules?
I can't "see we are ahead" if nobody tells me what is happening.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the devel