[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Using out of tree modules in d-i?


Turbo proposed a few patches to add ZFSonLinux support to d-i. Using
'?' to mark some components as optional happens in several other
places, but I'm worried about using that for kernel modules[1].

 1. http://anonscm.debian.org/gitweb/?p=d-i/debian-installer.git;a=commitdiff;h=d8ef3f7047a005aced83ce77d88fb9952b3fea7e

Having out of tree modules means an extra sync is needed to get all
pieces together when the kernel bumps its version, when it comes to
migration to testing, and when it comes to releasing d-i. Not to
mention the usual “oops, OOT modules broke with that new kernel”. It's
also very unlikely that I'm going to be the one fixing those.

-boot@: am I painting a darker picture than what's ahead of us, or
does that look accurate enough?

I'm also not sure how kernel maintainers see (new) OOT modules in the
archive (AFAIUI the general feeling is: there should be no OOT
modules, period; but I might be misremembering things, I don't follow
kernel things closely enough).

-kernel@: your opinion on those?


Reply to: