Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, Jun 10, 1998 at 10:41:41AM +0200, Yann Dirson wrote: > > > I think the various modules should be primarily packaged in source > > form, just as the kernel is, and installed under /usr/src/modules/. > > This sounds excellent. On one machine I am running 2.0.33 > and have the appropriate ntfs package installed, but it will not insert > (many missing symbols), presumably because it is my own compilation > of 2.0.33. Similarly I just upgraded another box to 2.0.34 and have > installed ftape-3.04d from sources. It is presently much easier to work > with sources to such kernel addons, imho.
I disagree. You're about to follow the same path that was followed for kernel-source which has various awkward problems. Forcing .deb files into handling source packages is a bad idea. Instead we should add an option to dselect/apt to download and unpack the real source package in /usr/src. If we compiled the standard kernel with CONFIG_MODVERSIONS then we can safely install modules in /lib/modules or /lib/modules/2.0 instead of for a specific version. This doesn't really handle conflicts between different incompatible versions of a 2.0 kernel, but for modules like alsa would probably work fine. Otherwise the user can download the source package and recompile. greg -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
