Le sam. 3 sept. 2022 à 03:51, Sérgio Basto <ser...@serjux.com> a écrit : > > Hi, > > I'd like that you notice we have a kmods SIG on Centos > (https://sigs.centos.org/kmods/) which > is a continuation of http://elrepo.org/ (that already use > one modified version of kmodtool) the kabi and weak-modules runs well > and more important alone it is autonomous does everything alone > we have one implementation of kabi ( > https://pagure.io/centos-sig-kmods/kabi/commits/c8s ) also provided by > kmods SIG
This is not a new thing and the downstream fork they use is still to be contributed to our upstream fedora. (regardless as fedora kernel doesn't enable kabi so we will need to rebuild every kmod for every kernel in fedora anyway, kabi won't help here) We are the upstream and this fork should be contributed back to us, not use reverting to their version... I'm against calling that kmodtool3 something that would only pick the kABI changes. The kmodtool3 would need to be a pure RPM macro implementation. Unfortunately the kmod macro file won't help _______________________________________________ rpmfusion-developers mailing list -- rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org To unsubscribe send an email to rpmfusion-developers-le...@lists.rpmfusion.org
