[OpenAFS] Re: kmod-openafs versioning on RHEL5

Simon Wilkinson sxw@inf.ed.ac.uk
Sun, 16 Mar 2008 10:44:26 +0000

On 16 Mar 2008, at 09:02, Axel Thimm wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 08:01:46PM -0400, Derrick Brashear wrote:
>> On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 6:22 PM, Axel Thimm  
>> <Axel.Thimm@atrpms.net> wrote:
>> YHO doesn't help that he's trying to use an older minor revision of
>> the RPMs he's using with a newer minor revision of modules; The  
>> kernel
>> version is entirely irrelevant.
>> foo-1-(`uname -r`) would still be older than foo-2-(`uname -r`).
> No, look closer and you'll see that he has two different uname-r, not
> the same. And by the very construction of the uname-r-in-name scheme
> this comparison cannot and shouldn't be done.

Erm. No. The problem here was that the OP had built his first kernel  
module (and userland) from openafs-1.4.5-2.el5, and his second kernel  
module from openafs-1.4.5-1.el5. The upgrade failure was entirely  
because the second module was built from an earlier OpenAFS RPM, and  
not any problems with the uname -r location in the kmod scheme. You  
may be right about the benefits of kmdl vs kmod, but they just aren't  
relevant to this case.