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

Re: Why are modules and modules.conf not versioned?

Previously Eric Richardson wrote:
> I don't particularly want to argue but for the standard user without a 
> lot of sysadmin type requirements such as web servers, NFS etc. when you 
> install a program and follow any setup configuration, it just works and 
> to me this a professional feature that makes me want to use and support 
> and recommend Debian.

Standard users don't need to change the kernel either.

> Modules are ignored with an error message. I have a 2.4.7 kernel and it 
> has several things different than the 2.4.18 and complains with error 
> messages which is only asthethic.

I think we are cross-talking here. When it comes to modules.conf you can
put lots of stuff in there for modules that do not exist or are not
used. That is simply ignored. You seem to be talking about something
else though?

> If every other piece of the kernel is used in a versioned fashioned and 
> called from lilo as such(or via symlinks from a generic name) then it 
> makes sense that the /etc/modules and modules.conf should be versioned 
> as well.

Nothing is versioned though as far as I know.

> Of course if I can't convince you then how could I convince everyone
> that a possible change is in order. I did think based on some of the
> other threads on this list about improving Debian made this a viable
> idea at this time. Don't take this as whining as it is not meant to
> be.

I don't take this as whining, but at the moment I do not see the problem
you are trying to solve.


 /wichert@wiggy.net         This space intentionally left occupied \
| wichert@deephackmode.org                    http://www.wiggy.net/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |

Reply to: