On Thu, 14 Jun 2007, Steve Langasek wrote: > My two objections to this are scalability, and lack of comprehensiveness. > It's not scalable because it means the maintainers of the linux-latest-2.6 > package have to centrally keep track of every package in the archive > providing a module metapackage; and it's not comprehensive because you say > at the end that you only want it to list packages that are autobuilt.
Well, the fact that I restrict it to auto-built package is precisely a compromise in favor of scalability. Auto-built packages are already centralized in linux-modules-* and it should be doable to automate this process much like the rest is already automated. > Why would it not be sufficient for the metapackages to each depend on the > corresponding linux-image package? That eliminates the need for a central > registry of such packages. You could be right... do you mean something like this? Package: <something>-modules-2.6-686 Depends: linux-image-2.6-686 (= 2.6.21+7) This should give the same behaviour indeed. The modules meta-package would be broken when the linux-image-2.6 metapackages are upgraded unsynchronized. Cheers, -- Raphaël Hertzog Premier livre français sur Debian GNU/Linux : http://www.ouaza.com/livre/admin-debian/
