On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 02:13:56PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:50:46PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 18, 2008 at 01:42:49PM -0600, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> > >>>>> "PJ" == Peter Jones <pjones(a)redhat.com>
> > PJ> That doesn't guarantee the right thing -- it's inverted. It
> > PJ> it so that before kernel-devel's %post runs, kernel must be
> > PJ> installed. What Matt needs is a guarantee that kernel-devel is
> > PJ> installed (if it will be installed at all) before kernel's %post
> > PJ> runs.
> > Well, since kernel-devel is the package that's actually the one you
> > need to do anything, can't you just trigger on kernel-devel installs?
> no, because if DKMS decides it needs to call mkinitrd again, it needs
> to have kernel installed. It really is a "both and please", hence
> %posttrans gets us that.
So, now that this has run its course (yet again), can I ask that my
patches be applied? Those that create a kernel.spec %posttrans, which
invokes new-kernel-pkg --rpmposttrans, which invokes the scripts in
If running all of /etc/kernel/postinst.d/ is so scary, I'm ok with
new-kernel-pkg explicitly doing
[ -x /etc/kernel/postinst.d/dkms ] && /etc/kernel/postinst.d/dkms $kernelver
but I think we've beaten the fact that RPM can't do what I need
(today, that could be changed, but I don't really want to wait forever
for that to happen...).
akmodsd needs this type of functionality too. I really want to see
this implemented. What more can I do to push this forward?
Linux Technology Strategist, Dell Office of the CTO