Re: [arch-general] AL gnustep-core implementation misses gnustep-back

2018-01-11 Thread LoneVVolf
On 11-01-18 15:48, Bartłomiej Piotrowski via arch-general wrote: On 2018-01-09 13:32, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: I'd like to keep maintaining oolite if it's not too much work but I'm definitely not going to touch GNUstep stuff. So if no one is going to maintain GNUstep in official repos, we shoul

Re: [arch-general] Is linux extramodules dir named most appropriately?

2018-01-11 Thread Genes Lists via arch-general
On 1/11/18 12:39 PM, Bruno Pagani wrote: ... ... because the new version of those packages won’t have the dir anymore. Regards, Bruno Ding ... duh of course ... thank you both for your patience ...

Re: [arch-general] Is linux extramodules dir named most appropriately?

2018-01-11 Thread Bruno Pagani via arch-general
Le 11/01/2018 à 18:35, Genes Lists via arch-general a écrit : > On 1/11/18 12:15 PM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote: > .. >> *What* directory removal logic??? >> >> pacman -Qo /usr/lib/modules/extramodules-4.14-ARCH/ >> >> Anyway, see how Red Hat uses "weak modules" in much the same way. >> >

Re: [arch-general] Is linux extramodules dir named most appropriately?

2018-01-11 Thread Genes Lists via arch-general
On 1/11/18 12:15 PM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote: .. *What* directory removal logic??? pacman -Qo /usr/lib/modules/extramodules-4.14-ARCH/ Anyway, see how Red Hat uses "weak modules" in much the same way. When linux is updated to 4.15 the old 4.14.13-1-ARCH modules directory will b

Re: [arch-general] Is linux extramodules dir named most appropriately?

2018-01-11 Thread Eli Schwartz via arch-general
On 01/11/2018 11:27 AM, Genes Lists via arch-general wrote: > On 1/11/18 9:45 AM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote: > ... >> >> Because the extramodules directory is designated for thirdparty modules >> that are believed to be compatible with any kernel patch release of the >> same major.minor v

Re: [arch-general] Is linux extramodules dir named most appropriately?

2018-01-11 Thread Genes Lists via arch-general
On 1/11/18 9:45 AM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote: ... Because the extramodules directory is designated for thirdparty modules that are believed to be compatible with any kernel patch release of the same major.minor version. If the module needs to be recompiled with patch releases, it shou

Re: [arch-general] AL gnustep-core implementation misses gnustep-back

2018-01-11 Thread Bartłomiej Piotrowski via arch-general
On 2018-01-09 13:32, Sven-Hendrik Haase wrote: > I'd like to keep maintaining oolite if it's not too much work but I'm > definitely not going to touch GNUstep stuff. So if no one is going to > maintain GNUstep in official repos, we should drop oolite. I'm going to drop oolite and remaining GNUstep

Re: [arch-general] Is linux extramodules dir named most appropriately?

2018-01-11 Thread Eli Schwartz via arch-general
On 01/11/2018 09:09 AM, Genes Lists via arch-general wrote: > The linux package creates 2 directories; for example: > >    /usr/lib/modules/4.14.13-1-ARCH >    /usr/lib/modules/extramodules-4.14-ARCH > > Question - Why is the latter not named extramodules-4.14.13-1-ARCH? > > Both are owned by th

[arch-general] Is linux extramodules dir named most appropriately?

2018-01-11 Thread Genes Lists via arch-general
The linux package creates 2 directories; for example: /usr/lib/modules/4.14.13-1-ARCH /usr/lib/modules/extramodules-4.14-ARCH Question - Why is the latter not named extramodules-4.14.13-1-ARCH? Both are owned by the linux-4.14.13 package - and extramodules-4.14-ARCH will also be owned by