On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 18:00 +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 18:42 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 11:26 -0400, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote:
> > On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 18:04 +0300, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2005-06-28 at 10:40 -0400, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > > > As an aside, I didn't think Extras was ready to tackle the issue
of
> > > > kernel module packages yet.
> > >
> > > Right, at least three issues remain: how to name the modules, how to
> > > make depsolvers do the right thing with them, and how to request builds
> > > for i586 and i686 from the build system for the same package.
> >
> > Screw i586 for now.
>
> I'll screw it once the i586 kernel is screwed from FC :) Seriously,
> there are cases where i586 and external kernel modules are a valid
> scenario;
As architectures actually are switched outside of rpm-specs
(rpmbuild --target=..) this isn't a packaging issue, but actually is a
build system issue.
I.e. the buildsystem has to be equipped with means to specify
architectures, because rpm specs can't handle it.
It's also an rpmdb issue as you (or at least *I*) can't have
kernel-devel.i586 and kernel-devel.i686 installed simultaneously even
though there are no file conflicts between the packages.
--
Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams <ivazquez(a)ivazquez.net>
http://fedora.ivazquez.net/
gpg --keyserver
hkp://subkeys.pgp.net --recv-key 38028b72