[WIP] Create kernel-core and kernel-drivers subpackages

[Al Dunsmuir]

On Wednesday, March 19, 2014, 2:09:15 PM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting at splat.cc> wrote:
>> Josh Boyer (jwboyer at fedoraproject.org) said:
>>> > 2) A per-arch filter list, because the existing one that works on
>>> > x86_64 leaves modules in kernel-core on ARM that lack their
>>> > dependencies.  Bad.
>>>
>>> OK, I sorted this out this week.  I believe the only arch left to do is
>>> s390x and that's only because I forgot about it.  Oops.
>>
>> Is this even needed on s390 for reasons other than consistency? Similarly
>> with power, is the idea to have a core kernel for running on an LPAR and
>> then -drivers for the rest of it?

> Needed?  Probably not.  At the moment it's not possible to build a
> normal kernel on one arch and the split on another.  If we're going to
> go off and make changes to anaconda and yum and dnf to cope with this,
> consistency on what is shipped is probably a good thing.

> That being said, it is flexible in terms of the content of those
> packages.  So ppc64 could do what you suggest.  s390x would arguably
> just shove almost everything in -drivers.  In reality, I expect most
> arches to just install both packages anyway.

If  you  update  the ppc64 kernel package, please also do the same for
the ppc 32-bit kernel.

There  are a few of us out there with vintage PPC hardware. This week,
I  picked  up  an IBM 7046-B50 (32-bit only, CHRP), to go with the PPC
Macs  (G5,  G4,  G3)  that  I've  been  gathering  with  the intent of
recreating  a  minimal  vintage  PPC spin (likely based on LXDE). This
would include support for other non-Mac 32-bit PPC systems.

While  most  of the official effort is 64-bit (BE and now LE), the PPC
arch  still  builds  32-bit userspace packages, and has stated that in
their wiki that they have no intent to discontinue 32-bit kernels.

Thanks!
Al