Hi Casey,

which documentation is the customer referring to? kindly add a link to the specific book and section where this should be updated.

this will give me an idea as to who should pick up this bug for processing. thanks!

I was referring to kerneldrivers.org.

However, studying it again, you can say that this is documented by the sample spec file at http://kerneldrivers.org/RedHatKernelModulePackages, which contains the line

export INSTALL_MOD_DIR=extra/%{kmod_name}

It is not made clear that this is a mandatory convention, though. Building a kmod which uses a different INSTALL_MOD_PATH succeeds, just when the kmod is installed on the customer system subtle errors like missing weak modules are caused.

Our idea was to call the directory extra/%{vendor_name}-%{kmod_name}; that a) makes it clearer where the module comes from and b) allows the coexistence of different vendor modules. I admit that the practical use of b) is very limited.

Anyway, I don't think it makes any sense to proceed this discussion. We have aworkaround for this (modified kmodtool) and that's fine.

This bug can be closed.

thanks Martin. closing this bug now.