On 14 January 2016 at 19:29, Andrew Lutomirski <l...@mit.edu> wrote:
>
> On Jan 14, 2016 9:34 AM, "Nicolas Chauvet" <kwiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> 2016-01-14 18:05 GMT+01:00 Neal Gompa <ngomp...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Reindl Harald <h.rei...@thelounge.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Am 14.01.2016 um 16:56 schrieb Neal Gompa:
>>> >>
>>> >> I've recently been wondering why we haven't allowed kernel module
>>> >> packages in Fedora since Fedora 8. I've tried searching through our
>>> >> wiki and the mailing list, but I haven't come up with any concrete
>>> >> reasons for why we disallow them.
>>> >>
>>> >> If it is perhaps the issue of keeping things in sync with kernels we
>>> >> provide (that is, maintainers didn't/couldn't keep up with new kernels
>>> >> being pushed during a release cycle), then I think the situation has
>>> >> changed.
>>> >>
>>> >> We have two tools that can help us in this regard: akmod and Koschei,
>>> >> both came after our policy change to disallow kernel modules.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > akmod is a dirty hack and fails often enough for rpmfusion stuff
>>> >
>>> > additionally you should *never* need GCC and devel packages installed
>>> > on a
>>> > normal enduser system for a ton of reasons
>>>
>>> The most common reason that akmod fails is the same reason dkms often
>>> fails: the correct kernel-devel isn't installed. For whatever reason,
>>> there's no logic in DNF to handle this case properly. Of course, to be
>>> fair, this problem happens in Yum too, but since Yum isn't actively
>>> supported in Fedora anymore, it's not as much of a concern.
>>
>>
>> Maybe this particular concern can be addressed in DNF with a plugin ?
>>
>> The way I've previously worded a possible solution is to have a yum/dnf
>> plugin for akmod.
>> This plugin will select the appropriate kernel-devel based on the kernel
>> that is currently installed.
>> ( https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3386 ).
>>
>> But this dnf plugin can be useful by default in fedora, since the
>> kernel-devel issue can rise when one user install a particular development
>> group where kernel-devel is needed.
>> (user typically ends with kernel-debug-devel instead of the one for their
>> kernel variant that can also be kernel-lpae or else).
>
> There are two issues here, I think:
>
> 1. Is Fedora okay, in principle, with shipping out-of-tree modules?
>
> I won't comment on #1.  (I also won't comment on Secure Boot issues.)
>
> 2. Assuming that shipping an out-of-tree module is okay, is akmod a good
> mechanism?
>
> I would argue strongly that akmod is *not* a good mechanism.
>
> Clearly any end-user-box-builds-modules system needs the package manager to
> pull in the right devel stuff.  This is clearly a solvable problem.
>
> But akmod in particular has a really nasty built-in assumption: it assumes
> that the running kernel came from an RPM at all.  For people who write
> kernels, this utterly sucks.  For example, I have no intention of rpm-ifying
> every test kernel I build for my laptop.  I install them according to the
> standard arrangement, which "make install" can do just fine.  There are
> symlinks in standard places that a kmod build system could find.  Akmod
> can't do that.  Akmod also can't figure out what to make its freshly-built
> rpm depend on because there is no correct answer.
>
> I think that, if Fedora were to adopt a kmod build system: it should have a
> QA requirement: if you "make modules_install && make install" a kernel and
> boot into it, the kmod system should work.  Akmod fails utterly in that
> scenario.
>

I don't quite get this one, if you build any package from a non-rpm
source it's not a given that rpm modules will work with it. Akmod is
really a convenience for people reliant on non-tree modules who are
also using the distribution rpm kernel, so they have a chance of
getting a working module whenever the kernel updates. If you're
building your own kernel you probably know when you've done it and how
to build the module.

-- 
imalone
http://ibmalone.blogspot.co.uk
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to