On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Xyne <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > A naming conflict on the AUR between jme-git (JMicron Ethernet Linux > driver) > and jme-svn (jMonkey Engine) was recently brought to my attention. > Currently, > the names of kernel module packages are identical to the internal names of > the > modules recognized by e.g. modprobe and lsmod. > > Given that libraries and modules for programming languages and other > applications follow a naming scheme that includes the target application's > prefix in the package name (python-foo, aspell-foo, etc.), it would be > consistent to do the same with kernel modules, e.g. "linux-foo". > > I understand that there are likely a lot of packages that would be > affected by > the adoption of such a naming scheme, but the migration could be done > gradually > as packages are upgraded, with "provides" entries used to satisfy > dependencies > during the transitional period. > > Of course, a TODO list could manage this as well if you're up to it. > > The guidelines would also need to be updated: > https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Kernel_Module_Package_Guidelines > > Thoughts? > > > Regards, > Xyne > > I support a change of the module naming scheme too, having a prefix or suffix would mean less confusion. The only packages in our repos not following the current scheme are the vbox packages, they have a "-modules" suffix (virtualbox-guest-modules, virtualbox-host-modules), but "linux-*" and "linux-flavor-*" appear to be more sensible choices indeed.
If we go with that change, prepending "dkms-" to dkms sources instead of appending "*-dkms" would be a good idea too ( https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Dkms#Package_name). Cheers, -- Maxime
