kernel-modules-extra and GFS2

[Josh Boyer]

On Wed, Apr 11, 2012 at 7:36 AM, Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-04-11 at 07:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> > Well that is one possibility - I'm trying to find the documentation that
>> > explains the criteria for modules being moved into the
>> > kernel-modules-extra package and I've not found any so far....
>>
>> Essentially, it's:
>>
>> "Things that are not widely used in a typical Fedora setup, or things
>> that we might disable entirely but are moving to see if there are users
>> that notice."
>>
>> GFS2 falls into the first set, not the second.
>>
> Yes, but this makes no sense at all.... looking at the selection that
> has been made we have:
>
>  o DLM in the main kernel package
>  o OCFS2 and GFS2 - the only two in-kernel users of DLM in
> kernel-modules-extra
>
> I know that cLVM also uses DLM, but from userland and I wonder just how
> many people use cLVM who don't use of the cluster filesystems - probably
> a few, but most likely not a huge number. Perhaps more importantly, DLM
> depends on SCTP and SCTP is only in kernel-modules-extra, so I think
> this needs a rethink.

Nobody said we got everything perfect.  This kind of commentary and
review is very useful.

>> > However, if that is the correct solution, then I'm quite happy with it,
>> > but it isn't immediately obvious as to whether it is or not,
>>
>> We can move it back if needs be.  Honestly, we might wind up just
>> disabling the rest of the stuff contained in there and dropping the
>> sub-package entirely.  We're still kind of undecided on whether it's
>> worth doing at all.  Thus far there have been 3 requests to move a
>> module back.  The rest seem to be unnoticed.
>
> I can certainly open a bug to request a more sane assignment of modules
> to packages, but just wanted to be sure of the criteria so that I am
> asking for the correct things,

Yeah, "criteria" is very loosely defined here.  It mostly boiled down
to educated guesses.  Or in the case of SCTP, things we noticed weren't
used heavily and were somewhat notorious for having security issues.

Thanks for opening the bug.  We'll work it out there.

josh