On Wed, 14 Jan 2004, Dag Wieers wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jan 2004, Daniel Robitaille wrote: > > > 1) Since I installed FC1 just before Christmas, I have had to do 4 > > kernel upgrades in 3 weeks. Is that an anomalous period, or it's > > always going to be like that in the Fedora world? I don't remember so many > > kernel updates in a short time like this with RHL8/9. Or I'm getting > > what I'm paying for? :) > > > > Dec 24 14:48 vmlinux-2.4.22-1.2135.nptl > > Jan 6 17:50 vmlinux-2.4.22-1.2138.nptl > > Jan 7 23:19 vmlinux-2.4.22-1.2140.nptl > > Jan 13 20:40 vmlinux-2.4.22-1.2149.nptl > > Also a huge pain for kernel-module packagers. For each kernel release I'm > doing about 14 packages for 4 archs and 4 distributions, for smp and up. > > That's about 448 kernel-module packages for each new kernel. It takes > more than 24 hours to do ;( Ouch... Since this came up, while more a -devel topic, packaging kernel modules into rpm's the way all the 3rd party repos are doing now is really a road to madness. Not only because the endless rebuild requirement but also end user transparency.. the current methods of upgrading those packages are by no means perfect :( Have you looked at "Dynamic Kernel Module Support"? http://lists.us.dell.com/pipermail/linux-poweredge/2003-March/023795.html (I haven't yet but intend to..) The described intent in the link above is actually for the reverse situation compared to what we're talking now but I think it could be used for our purposes just as well... (assuming it works and has no further complications of its own :) - Panu -
