[Fedora-packaging] Re: kmdls: very good support for custom kernels (was: kernel-module packaging discussing ...)

[Axel Thimm]

On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 01:30:06PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>  
>  
>  Axel Thimm schrieb:
>  > On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 12:54:06PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>  >>
>  >> Axel Thimm schrieb:
>  >>> On Fri, Aug 18, 2006 at 01:11:57PM +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
>  >>>> On Thu, 2006-08-17 at 13:36 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
>  >>> And to cut to the chase: Ever tried to support special kernel rpms
>  >>> like swsusp2 or ccrma's low-latency kernels? I did and know it works
>  >>> for kmdl and will fail with kmod.
>  >> I looked into this once and I'd like to give people a bit more
>  >> background from my point of view:
>  >>
>  >> Yes, kmod fails for the swsusp2 kernel from http://mhensler.de/swsusp/.
>  >> But that's not directly a bug/problem in kmod. kmods would work if the
>  >> swsusp2 kernel would be packaged exactly in the same way as the FC
>  >> kernels are packaged. But that's not the case.
>  > 
>  > which was done deliberately to not conflict with having the same name
>  > with a Fedora package, just as the highest mandate coming from Fedora
>  > to 3rd parties is, right?
>  
>  Right, but it can be done in different ways, e.g. in a ways, that
>  follows the general naming and file-placing behavior from the Fedora
>  kernels or in ways that differ -- in case of the swsusp the latter was
>  chosen. 
Just outline a way that custom kernel packages could be created
Fedora-conform and be supported by kmods, because I just stated in the
mail you replied to, that this is impossible:

 If you follow Fedora compliance you lose kmod support, if you
 follow kmod compliance you lose Fedora compliance.

I also showed real life examples for all cases.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net