Hide Forgot
Description of problem: With the 3.2 kernel in rawhide there is now an optional kernel-modules-extra package that has per kernel modules. If you have this installed you want to install it per kernel. Not having kernel-modules-extra in the default install only list is going to catch some people by surprise. I don't know if the plan is to use kernel-modules-extra for F15 or F16 if the 3.2 kernel gets brought back there. But adding kernel-modules-extra to the install only list for F15 and F16 wouldn't hurt. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): yum-3.4.3-16.fc17 How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info:
The kernel-modules-extra subpackage is F17 and future only. It won't be included in F15/F16. Also, I don't think it needs to be installed by default at all. If it does, then it isn't serving the purpose it was added for. At that point, I'd just remove it.
The install only list specifies packages that can be installed multiple times. I don't believe it forces the package to be installed. But if it is installed and you do a yum update another copy gets installed instead of replacing the previous version. There is a limit on how many versions are kept and the oldest (by version) are removed when the limit is exceeded. If you don't do this and you need to fall back to a previous kernel, the modules supplied by kernel-modules-extra for that kernel won't be there. This will be unexpected and could cause issues for people (depending on how critical any modules they are using are).
My mistake. I should learn to read more carefully while on PTO. Your clarification and RFE sounds good indeed.
kernel-PAE-modules-extra might also need to get included. Though when I accidentally only included kernel-modules-extra in the install only list, kernel-PAE-modules-extra got treated as install only, so there may be some magic adding PAE in when needed.
> so there may be some magic adding PAE in when needed. Package is installonly when either the package name or any of it's provides are listed in the installonly option. kernel-PAE-modules-extra-3.2.0-0.rc7.git3.1.fc17.i686.rpm provides kernel-modules-extra.
Can this package not just provide kernel-modules? Another option is to make a generic "kernel-related-pkg" provide, then this can be the last thing we add to this list.
I am not really the best person to answer that question. I suspect there would be a problem with providing kernel-modules since there is still a kernel-modules rpm. Packages being able to flag themselves as install only seems like it might be a better way to go. If this could make sense for other things that aren't kernel related, maybe the provides should be called something like install-only?
(In reply to comment #6) > Can this package not just provide kernel-modules? No, it doesn't actually provide ALL of the kernel-modules so I don't think we'd want an artificial Provides like that. > Another option is to make a generic "kernel-related-pkg" provide, then this can > be the last thing we add to this list. Can you elaborate on that a bit? If you mean just adding Provides: kernel-related-pkg to all kernel related packages, I'm not sure if that will really do what we want (maybe it will?). At the moment, we'd add it to kernel and kernel-modules-extra, which isn't much different than just adding kernel-modules-extra to install-only from what I can see. Are you concerned about us growing more kernel-space subpackages (as opposed to e.g. kernel-tools which is userspace stuff)?
(In reply to comment #8) > (In reply to comment #6) > > Can this package not just provide kernel-modules? > > No, it doesn't actually provide ALL of the kernel-modules so I don't think we'd > want an artificial Provides like that. Fair enough. > > Another option is to make a generic "kernel-related-pkg" provide, then this can > > be the last thing we add to this list. > > Can you elaborate on that a bit? If you mean just adding Provides: > kernel-related-pkg to all kernel related packages, I'm not sure if that will > really do what we want (maybe it will?). Yes, doing this. > At the moment, we'd add it to kernel > and kernel-modules-extra, which isn't much different than just adding > kernel-modules-extra to install-only from what I can see. All we'd need to do is add it to this pkg. and add it to install-only ... so there's no immediate benefit over just adding kernel-modules-extra. The problem is that this has been true the last N times we've done this, and adding to the install-only list is annoying for a few reasons ... and each item we add to the install-only list has to be compared against all 140k+ provides in Fedora. > Are you concerned about us growing more kernel-space subpackages (as opposed to > e.g. kernel-tools which is userspace stuff)? Yeh, basically kernel-modules-<foo> for different products or something.
I've posted a patch upstream, for review, which adds: installonlypkg(kernel-module) installonlypkg(vm) ...to the list, so any package providing either of those will get installonly functionality.
I am not in a position to modify the kernel-modules-extra package to provide kernel-module. So the needinfo is a bit misdirected. Thanks for making the change in yum though. I've changed the needinfo to Josh instead.
Ugh, I'm not CC'd so I didn't see your reply James. Apologies. I don't really foresee us creating more sub-packages of the kernel at all, and quite honestly the one we have now might die a firey death if it doesn't pan out well with Alpha. Fedora doesn't have different products in regards to the kernel, and I would very seriously doubt that RHEL would adopt kernel-modules-extra to begin with. They can just turn off whatever they don't really support. However, adding a Provides for 'kernel-module' might be doable since it certainly does provide at least one module. What a difference a single letter can make. I'll discuss it with the kernel team. Out of curiosity, what is 'installonlypkg(vm)' intended for?
I just made the kernel-modules-extra package in rawhide and F17 do the virtual provides for this. I believe this can be closed now?
This should probably stay open until a kernel with the change is available. I can test that this works as expected with the next kernel build and close the ticket if it does.
I have confirmed this change is working as expected with the 3.4.2-4.fc17 kernel package.
kernel-3.4.2-4.fc17 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 17. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-3.4.2-4.fc17
kernel-3.4.2-1.fc16 has been submitted as an update for Fedora 16. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/updates/kernel-3.4.2-1.fc16
kernel-3.4.2-4.fc17 has been pushed to the Fedora 17 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.
kernel-3.4.2-1.fc16 has been pushed to the Fedora 16 stable repository. If problems still persist, please make note of it in this bug report.