Kernel package and modules

[Werner Almesberger]

Andy Green wrote:
> Moving Ethernet over USB into a module exposed existing problems that
> need solving anyway.  We did not take care about module versioning, and
> we should deprecate monolithic kernel -only updates (ie, DFU) for normal
> use if we use modules at all.

Well, as long as we can make sure no essential features depend on
modules and that modules with the wrong version get rejected, a
monolithic kernel would be good enough to get us going.

So it seems that, if we
- enable module versioning (heh, never notices that one ;-), and
- put EoUSB back in the monolithic kernel for now
we should be good for a while, no ?

> What we are better doing is attacking these real problems rather than
> retreating.

I was more thinking of luring them into our ambush, after they've
marched through our vast snowfields and when the sun is in their
eyes ;-)

> For example, someone suggested again having a backup
> kernel... we allocated 8MByte of space in the kernel partition and can
> easily fit a "no modules" kernel at the end of it.

Aiii, I smell complexity. Now you either need to introduce a new
partition, teach u-boot some math, or add the backup kernel partition
to he magic device-dependent u-boot environment variables. In any
case, you need to update the environment.

Also, DFU doesn't know anything about partial updates of partitions,
so splitting a partition only makes the DFU situation worse.

- Werner