[OpenAFS-devel] Fully Functional Client on Linux 2.6

[Matthew Miller]

On Fri, Jul 02, 2004 at 04:31:52PM -0400, Derek Atkins wrote:
> > Also along those lines -- do you see an advantage of having a separate
> > openafs-kernel subpackage? Why not just include that in -client?
> Yes, there's an advantage.  Indeed, my plan for the "official"

Let me be more specific. :)

What advantage do you see in having a separate package? In most cases, they
won't be built or upgraded separately from the client package anyway, will
they?


> openafs-1.4 RPMS is to have separate openafs-kernel RPMS for each
> kernel version.

Hmmm. That seems like a bit more overhead -- each new kernel version will
require changes at several places in the spec file. Each a cut & paste, but
with various lines changed....

But more importantly, how will that work for upgrades? I don't think you can
have multiple subpackages with the same name but different versions, so the
kernel version would have to be encoded in the subpackage name itself. Each
one could provide "openafs-kernel-module" or some other virtual name, and
each could require its corresponding kernel package, but how would the
packaging system know that a new version of the afs kernel module should be
installed when a new kernel is?


-- 
Matthew Miller           mattdm@mattdm.org        <http://www.mattdm.org/>
Boston University Linux      ------>                <http://linux.bu.edu/>