A question about NTFS

[Matthew Miller]

On Tue, May 17, 2005 at 07:14:51AM +0800, John Summerfied wrote:
> >it'd be nice if rpm depsolvers could automatically pull in updated kernel
> >modules when the kernel is updated -- i.e. if the kernel module rpms were
> Um, no. The more changes the more risk of failures such as the recent 
> 2.6.11 kernel that wouldn't boot|run on some hardware (USB problems) or 
> shutdown on mine.

Um, yes. If you install a new kernel, and your various kernel modules aren't
updated, it's *guaranteed* to be broken. But when you get a new kernel --
and you *will*, if the current security track record continues -- you also
*need* the matching new modules (installed, not upgraded, just like the
kernel itself).

The alternative is something like DKMS, which recompiles modules on the fly,
but that's fragile and prone to breaking itself. Why not just get modules
built for and tested with the new kernel RPM?

> _releases_ are for possible breakers, _maintenance_ is for fixing 
> broken, not for looking for new breakages.

That's a nice statement, but a non sequitur. The new module packages
likely wouldn't have any changes except for building against the new
kernel. It's _maintenance_ to update them for a new kernel.

I'm trying to picture the scenario you're afraid of here, and I'm just not
seeing it....

-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm at mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>
Current office temperature: 73 degrees Fahrenheit.