On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 4:16 AM, Mick <michaelkintz...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Friday 30 Aug 2013 15:44:35 Tanstaafl wrote: >> On 2013-08-30 10:34 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On 30/08/2013 16:29, Tanstaafl wrote: >> >> Why would there be a problem if someone decided to create a 3rd party >> >> overlay *not* part of the official gentoo portage tree that contained >> >> *only* the zfs stuff, and when this overlay was installed combined with >> >> a zfs keyword for the kernel, portage would then pull in the required >> >> files, and automagically build a kernel with an up to date version of >> >> zfs properly and fully integrated? >> >> >> >> Would this not work, *and* have no problems with licensing? >> > >> > there is no problem with licensing in that case. >> > The ebuild could even go in the portage tree, as Gentoo is not >> > redistributing sources when it publishes an ebuild. >> >> Thanks Alan! Just the answer I wanted. >> >> Ok, so... how hard would this be then? What would the chances be that >> this could actually happen? I'll happily go open a bug for it if you >> think the work would be minimal... >> >> It seems to me that I can't be the only one who would like to see this >> happen? > > Nope! I will vote for you. ;-) > > -- > Regards, > Mick
Sounds like an awful lot of trouble for a "problem" that's already solved by installing sys-kernel/module-rebuild and running "module-rebuild rebuild" after every kernel update, which is how nvidia, broadcom, and other kernel modules are dealt painlessly with anyways... -- This email is: [ ] actionable [x] fyi [ ] social Response needed: [ ] yes [x] up to you [ ] no Time-sensitive: [ ] immediate [ ] soon [x] none
