Re: Bug#147077: What is with the kernel maintainer? (How not to close Bug#147077)
On Fri, May 24, 2002 at 09:12:03AM -0400, Brian Mays wrote:
>
> Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au> answered:
>
> > OK, how about those who are using home made pcmcia-cs tools that still
> > rely on the symlink?
>
> I said a VALID reason. Pcmcia-cs tools that old use insmod and thus are
> broken anyway for the pcmcia drivers in the current 2.4 series kernels.
> I'm sure you'll agree with me here; you complain about pcmcia-cs using
> insmod all the time.
That's true only if they use yenta and did not include isa-pnp through
other means.
> > Perhaps it's because what you're asking for isn't as logical as you
> > think it is?
>
> If that is they way you feel, then please explain why you think it is
> illogical. I gave several reasons why I thought that it was a logical
> request. You should at least mention those reasons in your reply.
For starters removing the symlink doesn't really solve the problem that
got you here. Sure it will stop the errors in dpkg. But it doesn't solve
the fundamental problem of including two sets of modules with identical
names under the same directory.
Using conflicts would solve this problem but as you are aware it is
not trivial to implement cleanly.
IMHO this is a documentation issue: the user needs to be aware that they
should choose one set of PCMCIA modules rather than having both.
Alternatively kernel-package could be modified to always put PCMCIA modules
in a separate package.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: