Proposal to add build of kernel-backports package to kernel.spec

[Dave Jones]

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 04:48:07PM -0500, John W. Linville wrote:
 
 > Hmmm...I guess there was some misunderstanding between us.  I reckon
 > that I didn't catch that you were making a distinction between
 > compat-wireless and my tree that it pulls from.  I thought the
 > objection was to building a separate package from the kernel spec.

Earlier in this thread I mentioned wanting to avoid this situation:
<user> my wireless is broken.
*files bug*
<us> install compat-wireless!
<user> ok, it worked!

Why don't we just make this code the default, and have it just work.

 > FWIW, using the compat-wireless version is a lot less work, since all
 > the backporting bits should be done already.  And it takes advantage
 > of the backporting skills of the members of that project, rather
 > than relying solely on me.  I think it is a better way to proceed,
 > and one I can actually commit to doing.

How I see this making most sense :

f15/f16: what you have in compat-wireless, but apply it as default
so we ship *those drivers* rather than what was in 3.1

master: git-wireless.next

 > > (also, having it be a tarball is a pain wrt review)
 > 
 > True, but I'm not sure that a giant patch w/ all the wireless-next
 > bits in it would be any easier on the eyes...?

If there's a one-liner that needs fixing up, it means recreating
and reuploading a new tarball.

When these changes happen in tarballs, it's entirely opaque when
it goes to the commits list. We have no idea what changed.

	Dave