Hi! Yesterday I've created a 'kmod-MODULE_DIR' branch in nixpkgs and nixos svn. Then Eelco Dolstra and Shea Levy told me that they do not like the proposed change.
I've tried to create a small summary of the thread. Shea, could you correct me if I'm wrong, please? Pros of MODULE_DIR and /lib/modules approaches ============================================== (with comments by Yury Kudryashov) MODULE_DIR: =========== * Different processes can use different /nix/store/*modules* dirs. | Since we have one kernel loaded at every moment, this shouldn't be needed. | If someone really needs this, he can use '-d' flag. * Easier to catch buggy kernel module buildsystem. | Just use chroot builds. If you're not root, read the makefile(s) | carefully. | We'll need the same patches to buildsystem in both cases. The patches can | be accepted upstream and/or shared with mainstream distros. /lib/modules: ============= * No need to patch: - Kernel buildsystem (removing '-b' key); | I'm pretty sure that the patch will never be accepted upstream - kmod; | Same here - udev; | Same here, if patch needed (see below) - more packages to come later. | I'm not sure if we need to patch every package, but we definitely need to | ensure that every package using libkmod has MODULE_DIR env var set to the | desired value. - every shell script that has $(find /lib/modules/`uname -r`) | I have no well-known example of such script, but kmod has no | `modprobe -l` (this switch was deprecated in module-init-tools). * Easy to switch all running processes to a new module dir. | Rarely needed. It it's hard (impossible?) to reload many modules on the | fly, and it's rather easy to manually `insmod` a few modules. -- Yury G. Kudryashov, mailto: [email protected] _______________________________________________ nix-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.science.uu.nl/mailman/listinfo/nix-dev
