Hi! I think you haven't read my previous mail:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2003/debian-devel-200311/msg00204.html Please have a look at it, my response below assumes you did. On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 08:56:38AM -0600, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: > > As an academic exercise this is fine and dandy, but having two > competing packagings of the same _basic_ component can't do us any > good. This isn't a "competing" package. As I said before, the standard way Linux kernel packaging is handled is "a good choice for the power user". I don't intend to "replace" it or the like, just add more options for the people who like them. > If you have a problem with the way kernel packages are handled > (upgrades in particular, which seems to be your problem), go talk with > the official kernel image packages maintainer and work something out. If I had a "problem" with some package, I'd use the BTS or speak with the maintainer. This is not the case here. As explained before, my package build-depends on "kernel-patch-debian" and uses the standard patchset in that package. Rather than "duplicating work", it is "building on top of existing work". When I announced it (previous mail), Herbert Xu was on CC. He's the maintainer of "kernel-patch-debian" which does the real work for this package. My package is simply an extension for Herbert's work. I don't know wether he's interested or not in this extension, but I do obviously welcome his participation. > This creates _more_ work for everybody. Who is "everybody" (asides Linux kernel module maintainers)? > What do you want to do with > binaries of kernel modules? Have more duplication of effort? That's up to the module maintainers. Adding support for the Linux kernel when packaged as a standard Debian package is easy for them, since in packaging terms it's not much different than linking your package against a library. Certainly, if they choose to "duplicate effort" and support both alternatives, that will prove me right in the fact that both of them are interesting for the end user. -- Robert Millan "[..] but the delight and pride of Aule is in the deed of making, and in the thing made, and neither in possession nor in his own mastery; wherefore he gives and hoards not, and is free from care, passing ever on to some new work." -- J.R.R.T, Ainulindale (Silmarillion)
