On Tue, 16 Nov 2010, Karanbir Singh wrote:
On 11/16/2010 06:51 AM, Christoph Maser wrote:
> So unless someone stands up and wants to maintain the existing dkms
> packages, I think we should get rid of the current dkms packages (at
> least
> for RHEL5+).
good idea. ELRepo is going a really good job and getting rid of
unmaintaned packages is always a good idea.
If the assumption is the dkms world is only populated by local payloads, then
thats fine. I am not personally sure that is the case.
So while I agree and almost always have that kabi tracking with reasonable
testing is the way to go for local and perhaps inherited payloads - there are
a fair few third parties ( in reference with rpmforge as being the second
party ) who carry dkms payloads and can offload to there. VirtualBox being
perhaps the most user visible of the lot, some qlogic drivers being one of
the most obscure.
Is the thinking that drop everything dkms, or just dkms-<ko's> and retain
dkms itself ?
Only the unmaintained dkms modules. The dkms package stays available and
will be updated (when needed).
--
-- dag wieers, [email protected], http://dag.wieers.com/
-- dagit linux solutions, [email protected], http://dagit.net/
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.rpmforge.net/mailman/listinfo/users
