On Mon, 25 Aug 2003 21:51:57 +0200, martin f krafft <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> also sprach Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.08.25.1652
> +0200]:
>> If there is a single sane approach,
> Well, what's the single sane approach then? So far I've heard four,
> and they are all possible.
A) I said "if".
B)
> also sprach David Schleef <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003.08.25.0330 +0200]:
>> In reality, it doesn't matter what directory you put modules in,
>> since they all share the same namespace. You can't have two module
>> files called module_x.o and expect it to work. Users, however,
>> appreciate the separation.
So /lib/modules/$kvers/$package/ is as good as anything we
have seen. It is not as it any single machine is likely to have
hundreds of third party modules to so clutter up /lib/modules/$kvers/
that finer grained subdirs would be required.
manoj
--
The sun never sets on those who ride into it. RKO
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
