Re: [RFC] using kernel.bbclass rename hook for external modules as well

[Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 22-10-10 22:44, Khem Raj wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 10:06 AM, Chris Larson <clarson@kergoth.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Koen Kooi <k.kooi@student.utwente.nl>wrote:
>>
>>> Currently kernel.bbclass splits and renames modules into
>>> kernel-module-<foo>, but module.bbclass doesn't. What's your opinion on
>>> making modules.bbclass follow the same logic for consistency?
>>> To make upgrade paths work the 'kernel-modules' metapackage would be
>>> ${PN} for external modules.
>>>
>>
>> This sounds like a very good idea to me, it would make the package list much
>> more consistent and improve the user experience, imo.
> 
> yes I agree fully. Will there be issues with upgrades ?

There shouldn't be with the metapackage approach. What we currently do:

kernel:
'kernel-module-foo' -> have foo.ko
'kernel-modules' -> recommend all internal modules

external module:
'some-external-module' -> have bar.ko and baz.ko

In the new world:

kernel (unchanged):
'kernel-module-foo' -> have foo.ko
'kernel-modules' -> recommend all internal modules

external module:
'kernel-module-bar' -> have bar.ko
'kernel-module-baz' -> have baz.ko
'some-external-module' -> recommend kernel-module-bar kernel-module-baz

So most, if not all, external module recipes will be compatible with the
old naming.

Does that make things clearer?

regards,

Koen
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFMwpzEMkyGM64RGpERAlKBAJ0fXK1V+uY4weJj9I/0WGOTzymwBACfQRPq
XBKCNHfqSVFqtwB2dVgazpU=
=UH63
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----