On Fri, 2010-09-24 at 03:36 +0100, John Robinson wrote: > On 23/09/2010 21:25, Michael Jones wrote: > > I just installed FC13 yesterday, and the kernel is now 2.6.34.7-56. Argh! > > > > Is there a plan to update these drivers “yet again” .. > > Calm down, that's four requests in four days, I don't suppose you'll be > left waiting for long...
They are out now. > Having said that, I wish Red Hat (Fedora) would fix things so kernel > modules didn't need updating every time, maybe by using a magic number > for the API version or something. I do understand they'd find it hard to > make it stick for ever, though they probably ought to for RHEL at least > within minor releases unless there absolutely has to be a change, but > needing rebuilds for every new kernel when they release two kernels a > week seems a bit mean... It's nothing Red Hat/Fedora can really do, the kernel developers have committed to no ABI - if you want to keep ABI stability you need to stay on a fixed kernel and backport security fixes only. That's where RHEL3 is today (but not for long, it;s going EOL soon) and probably already the state of RHEL4. But RHEL5 is quite vivid and is getting new ABI changes at least on every major update. But with RHEL it's managable, it's every couple weeks and users are slow when upgrading RHEL, so there is always never someone complaining for missing "new" kernel support, on the contrary, you often have people that need kmdl support for several kernels behind (and that's when the self building capacities of the src.rpm come in handy). But Fedora is a moving target, and it's part of its development model. I wouldn't want to hinder it, it proved to be successful in quickly adopting new technologies, but the downside is the kmdl rebuilding business. You mat have noticed some delays lately. Part of it was a complete restructuring of the buildsystem to allow for quicker rebuilds. I think ATrpms will be able to react much faster now. :) -- http://thimm.gr/ - http://ATrpms.net/
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ atrpms-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-users
