Re: modules
On Mon, 2005-09-19 at 19:24 +0200, Sven Luther wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 01:25:31PM -0400, Andres Salomon wrote:
[...]
> >
> > Alright, I think I'm a fan of #2. The module maintainers upload their
> > packages to sid, with the binary package <module>-source in there. We
> > have a package called linux-external-modules that build-deps on all the
> > -source packages, and builds packages based upon them. The infrastructure
> > would be similar to the linux-2.6 package; gencontrol.py creates a huge
> > control file that lists each module (perhaps getting this list from the
> > build-dep list). This would look something like
>
> Problem with this would be that any -source breaking might mean breaking it
> all.
That's why we test! ;)
Anyways, it wouldn't break all, it would break all for a single
architecture. But yes, we would have to be pretty dynamic with what we
actually provide in terms of the modules, and apply pressure to -source
maintainers to fix FTBFS issues.
Reply to: