Bug 163406 (fc3kerneldevel)
| Summary: | FC3 contains backported kernel-devel packages from FC4. | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Fedora] Fedora | Reporter: | Gerald Thompson <geraldlt> |
| Component: | kernel | Assignee: | Dave Jones <davej> |
| Status: | CLOSED ERRATA | QA Contact: | Brian Brock <bbrock> |
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
| Priority: | medium | ||
| Version: | 3 | CC: | adams.mark.g, bitmage, bruce, dmitry, gabriella.schmidt, grdetil, greg, jeff, jpb54, mike, pfrields, supernov, wtogami |
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Target Release: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | i686 | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
| Last Closed: | 2005-08-30 01:53:42 UTC | Type: | --- |
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- |
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |
| Embargoed: | |||
|
Description
Gerald Thompson
2005-07-15 21:45:52 UTC
the laserjet issue is probably a dupe of #153252 Lets keep this bug focused on the kernel source issue. I screwed up, and backported the FC4 kernel-devel changes to the FC3 update. There's currently debate on fedora-list about whether to change back to the old-style or not. *** Bug 163410 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 163415 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 163551 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** While the FC4 kernel packaging model makes a lot of sense, I think it's a bad idea to change packaging models mid-stream for the FC3 distribution. It breaks the dependencies that may have been established for other 3rd party packages that include kernel modules. A package that depended only on "kernel" for FC3 before, suddenly must be dependent on "kernel-devel" too, but only if the kernel release is >= 2.6.12-1.1372_FC3. Even if you could easily deal with that in a package's .spec file, it still breaks packages that include kernel modules that were packaged before the kernel update. Or, to put it another way, it's still a bug. Errata updates within an established distribution shouldn't cause this much upheaval. Changing packaging models, regardless of how much of an improvement the new model might be, should be left for new distributions. Having said that, now that a lot of FC3 users have installed kernel-devel, you shouldn't just yank it away either in the next kernel update, unless the new kernel package somehow overrides or obsoletes kernel-devel. But will doing that cause grief when upgrading from FC3 to FC4? Hmmmmm... *** Bug 163618 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Completely agree with comment #8 . There are a lot of people who use FC in the production environment -- where would be better to use RHEL, but due to some reasons (absence of money, etc.) FC is used. Unfortunately, unlike RHEL, FC is unstable enough. Don`t add superfluous "instability" by sudden change of the scheme of kernel packages... *** Bug 164016 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 164249 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** *** Bug 164496 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** The -devel changes have been backed out in CVS. The next update will revert to the original FC3 behaviour. *** Bug 165067 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** The new kernel has appeared in updates/testing/3 ... But there is no kernel-smp-*-i586 . Such build is already excluded from FC4, but if it has been included in FC3, it should be supported while FC3 is supported. Otherwise there is a probability that someone using this kernel (including by mistake :-)) and hoping to receive updates from a usual place, will not receive any more kernel updates. *** Bug 166896 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** |