I'm going on vacation next week so I won't have a chance to look at changing the PKGBUILD before after(2. July). But if you have some old discussing about this topic I need to look at, just send an URL and I have a read.
But how does the people currently maintaining the driver packages feel about adopting a dkms version of it? I will be happy to port the old one. I can also be the maintainer of the ones I have hardware for if non of the current developers feel like it. Regards Troels On 6/21/07, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 6/21/07, Troels Liebe Bentsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I would like to propose the replacement of the current way of building > > external modules with DKMS(Dynamic Kernel Module Support Framework). > > > > The current way things work, is that every kernel package needs to > > build and maintain separate packages for out of tree modules/drivers > > like ipw3945, madwifi, fglrx, etc. So every time the kernel is updated > > new packages of the all the modules also needs to be rebuild(23 for > > -suspend2). And when a new version of a module is released all the > > individual packages for each kernel also needs to be updated. > > > > DKMS does away with this, DKMS is a shell script the helps in building > > and maintaining out of tree kernel modules. By using DKMS and shipping > > the source version of the module instead, DKMS can rebuild the module > > every time the kernel is updated. So we only need to maintain one > > package pr. module and it works with all the kernels with have in > > arch. > > > > This also has the advantage of making it easier to build your own > > kernel or provide another flavor on AUR. As driver/module updates and > > rebuilds is no longer needed. It's also reduces the amount of packages > > that the arch community has to maintain. > > > > What I have done so far is made DKMS modules for fglrx, ipw3945, > > madwifi and virtualbox. When you install the dkms modules they will > > automatically build and install a module for each kernel you have > > installed. > > > > What is missing is a way to rebuild the modules when the kernel is > > updated, but I'm not quite sure how to do this? Would > > /etc/mkinitcpio.d/ be a good place to put it? > > > > What does people think of this idea? > > > > And would the maintainers of old packages be willing to adopt the new > > DKMS packages? > > > > The packages can be found on AUR, search for dkms(how do I make a link > > to a search?) > > Had a look, it might be better if you put the dkms.conf in a seperate > file, rather than having a huge cat statement. > > I think we decided that we'd implement multiple-packages-in-one where > we could trim it down to building a package for each kernel, with only > the single PKGBUILD. > > I guess we'll need to have a look at both. > > James > > -- > iphitus // Arch Developer // iphitus.loudas.com > > _______________________________________________ > arch mailing list > [email protected] > http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch > _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
