Re: RFC: DKMS - Dynamic Kernel Module Support
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 02:51:00PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 4:00 PM, David Paleino <d.paleino@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > some time ago I filed a RFS [1] for DKMS [2], and Daniel Baumann <daniel> asked
> > me what advantages it had over module-assistant.
> > After some talking with upstream, here I have the answer.
>
> Only down side I worry about is that having such a solution encourages
> out-of-tree drivers. Personally, I'd prefer if Debian were to adopt
> some variation of Fedora's policy:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/KernelModules
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DavidWoodhouse/KmodProposal
>From what I rapidly read there, I understand that Fedora doesn't want to
*ship* drivers using dkms stuff, but doesn't care about users doing what
they want with it. And that's what it is about, imho. Having dkms in
Debian means users can install dkms drivers (provided by hardware
vendor for example) and have dell management stuff happy, it doesn't
mean *debian* has to ship drivers in dkms format.
Cheers,
--
Yves-Alexis
Reply to: