On Sat, 11 Aug 2007 16:21:47 -0500
Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch(a)dell.com> wrote:
On Sat, Aug 04, 2007 at 12:12:39PM -0400, Kelly wrote:
> On Friday, August 03, 2007 10:46 pm Jesse Keating wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 20:55:48 -0500
> >
> > Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)jdub.homelinux.org> wrote:
> > > And I am more and more starting to think this might be a _good_
> > > idea. Users that want modules we aren't willing to carry
> > > upstream can install the dkms "payload" (as you described it)
> > > for the module, build and install.
> > >
> > > Some might think this is too technical a hurdle for users to
> > > clear, but I think it might be worth examining. Care to draft
> > > a proposal for FESCo? We could evaluate it at the same time we
> > > do dwmw2/f13's.
> >
> > I'm not totally opposed to the idea, if the dkms system takes
> > care of the logic of building the module when new kernels land
> > and such.
>
> That was what Dell developed DKMS to handle; situations where
> people are installing outside modules while updating the kernel
> frequently. Every time a new kernel is booted, the autoinstalled
> automatically builds all installed DKMS modules for the new kernel
> before it starts. It takes care of the problem of having to create
> new packages for all the modules when the kernel is updated.
I've got a bugzilla request in (#250337) to add hooks to the kernel
Typo in the bug number? That one is for some SELinux denial.
josh