On 2016-04-18 02:24, Sébastien Luttringer wrote: > On jeu., 2016-04-14 at 18:54 +0200, Andreas Radke wrote: >> Am Thu, 14 Apr 2016 13:29:33 +0200 >> schrieb Ike Devolder <[email protected]>: >> >> I'm for binary modules for our -ARCH main kernel pkg. I see no real >> need for -lts modules but if there're a few people who find them >> useful I can handle the kernel rebuilds. >> >> No opinion about dkms at all. DKMS could be useful if a foo-dkms pkg is >> able to detect all local kernels and build required modules without >> interaction. dkms packages for kernel for which we provide binary >> modules doesn't provide any more comfort for the user to me. >> > > So far, everybody wants (or accept we need) a binary package for -arch kernel. > So, I pushed a binary package for virtualbox -arch kernel modules. > > I hope others dkms only packages (ndiswrapper, sysdig) will also provide a > binary version for the -arch kernel. This would be a step forward in a common > way of providing kernel modules. > > Regarding binary modules for -lts,-zen,-grsec, I think we should either > provides them or not. But not stay in each packager do is own choice. >
I'm happy now, thanks.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
