Re: Modules packaging policy - call for discussion

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Mon, Apr 03, 2006 at 10:37:43PM -0700, Jurij Smakov wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> In the discussion I've seen so far most people tend to favor the system, 
> in which each individual module package builds the binary packages 
> matching the current kernels. Based on that I've written a very 
> preliminary draft of the policy (below). One problem with the 
> described scheme is that there seems to be no way to ensure that a binary 
> kernel module package gets upgraded when the kernel gets upgraded. If you 
> have any ideas on how to achieve this, please share. I'll continue working 
> on a sample debian/rules file. Comments and suggestions are welcome!
> 
> Packaging scheme
> ----------------
> Each source package containing the out-of-tree kernel module source
> should produce the following binary packages: the binary-source
> package, which contains the module source in the form suitable for
> building by module-assistant, and binary-binary packages, matching the
> kernels currently available in the archive.
> 
> Source package
> --------------
> It should be possible to build all the binary packages from the source
> package simply by invoking the 'debian/rules binary' command. In order
> to build the binary-binary module packages for all supported flavours
> of the official kernels, the source package should Build-Depend on the 
> following packages:
> 
> * linux-headers-$(VERSION)-all: will pull in the linux-headers for
>   all supported flavours for current architecture.
> * module-assistant: recommended tool to build the binary modules.

So, directly using make-kpkg as was the recomended way until now is no more
supported ?

Is module-assistant already known to work with the new infrastructure ? What
about debhelper, which produce a make-kpkg using package for modules ?

Friendly,

Sven Luther