Re: The future of m-a and dkms
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 06:00:10PM -0500, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 23:52:22 +0100 Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> > On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 23:21 +0100, Patrick Matthäi wrote:
> > > since we have got a stable release with dkms now, I am asking myself, if
> > > it is still necessary to support module-assistant.
> > > dkms is IMHO the better system and maintaining two different systems for
> > > kernel modules is a bit bloated.
> > With dkms, can you also create packages of the modules?
> > At least I found it always very useful, to create modules with m-a, or
> > via make-kpkg, and provide them via local archives to all my Debian
> > boxes. Can save quite some compilation time, and one doesn't need kernel
> > header + build packages etc. on all nodes.
> Yes, there is the "mkdeb" command-line option, but I suppose that
> doesn't get as much testing as it should.
Is there a way to ask it to build for more than one kernel version?
My other issue with dkms is that I have to provide an explicit list of
modules beforehand as part of the spec. In the case of DAHDI there are
three modules that are added as part of the patches. This means I can't
easily include it upstream.
m-a did not need any patching for the extra modules.
Tzafrir Cohen | email@example.com | VIM is
http://tzafrir.org.il | | a Mutt's
firstname.lastname@example.org | | best
email@example.com | | friend