Re: [PATCH 0/1] Modular Kernel packaging rework
On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 12:24:10PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
On 04/02/2014 12:12 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>On Wed, Apr 02, 2014 at 11:56:16AM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
>>On 04/01/2014 04:48 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
>>>I'd really appreciate it if people could look the patch over and provide
>>>further feedback and/or Acks.
>>Assuming you did not look into these things based on the affected
>>scope on the feature page but you are ensuring no breakage in Dracut
>>or Default enable services that expect modules to be available etc?
>Given that a normal install will still be looking for kernel, and kernel
>is a metapackage that requires kernel-core and kernel-drivers, the
>installed set of content is identical to today. So Server, Workstation,
>existing installs should be fine.
The magic word should ;)
I tested it in a VM several times, going back and forth between existing
kernels and kernels from the COPR. It worked as expected. I also
tested just installing kernel-core and the VM booted as expected. I
would not expect e.g. my laptop to boot with just kernel-core.
The Cloud WG really needs to drive as much of the testing as they can
here. It's their Change request.
>For Cloud, that's up to them to sort out given that they
wanted the
>smaller kernel.
Is this split good enough to used by embedded or can we expect
another split ( or shaving of core or drivers ) if there emerges an
embedded WG?
Further tuning would be needed, perhaps with the exception of ARM.
Really though, tranditional embedded usecases build per-board kernels so
a distro kernel isn't really well suited to that at all. It's difficult
to answer definitively without knowing further what embedded means.
josh