On Sat, Mar 15, 2014 at 12:04 AM, Matthew Miller
On Fri, Mar 14, 2014 at 09:52:15PM +0900, Sandro red Mathys wrote:
> In the past ~24h, I've been preparing the "Modular Kernel Packaging
> for Cloud" change. Before I submit it to the wrangler, I'm looking for
> everyone's feedback. Note this is my first change proposal so I might
> have misunderstood things or whatever.
Looks basically good to me.
I added the additional benefit about possibly reduced need for security
If we are not including Anaconda developers as owners, I think that
under the "dependency" section.
Right, I didn't add it as the kernel split itself does not technically
depend on Anaconda. But on the otherhand, I required the adoption in
So I now added a note to the scope that it's not absolutely critical
for the actual change and added it as a soft dependency, too. I know,
we absolutely do want it (and I think the Anaconda team has already
taken the necessary steps) but technically splitting the kernel does
not depend on it.
Have you tested how yum/dnf work with
upgrades (and with yum's feature for protecting the running kernel from
being removed)? Those might need to go in scope and deps too.
Continuing this discussion in the other thread. :)