From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail1.windriver.com ([147.11.146.13])
	by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72)
	(envelope-from <mark.hatle@windriver.com>) id 1UFm5s-0001xi-2c
	for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org;
	Wed, 13 Mar 2013 14:52:41 +0100
Received: from ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (ala-hca.corp.ad.wrs.com
	[147.11.189.40])
	by mail1.windriver.com (8.14.5/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r2DDZ41W029162
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=FAIL);
	Wed, 13 Mar 2013 06:35:05 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Marks-MacBook-Pro.local (172.25.36.234) by
	ALA-HCA.corp.ad.wrs.com (147.11.189.50) with Microsoft SMTP Server id
	14.2.342.3; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 06:35:04 -0700
Message-ID: <51408086.6020703@windriver.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 08:35:02 -0500
From: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>
Organization: Wind River Systems
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8;
	rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Bruce Ashfield <bruce.ashfield@gmail.com>
References: <513FACF7.5000907@windriver.com>
	<CADkTA4O+=ot0kt-aMzHTiVLEsYMNCrWutpDUCfgxTKrBd4zcVQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADkTA4O+=ot0kt-aMzHTiVLEsYMNCrWutpDUCfgxTKrBd4zcVQ@mail.gmail.com>
Cc: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Subject: Re: update-alternatives and kernel modules
X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11
Precedence: list
List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core.lists.openembedded.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openembedded-core>,
	<mailto:openembedded-core-request@lists.openembedded.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core>
List-Post: <mailto:openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openembedded-core-request@lists.openembedded.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core>,
	<mailto:openembedded-core-request@lists.openembedded.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 13:52:44 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On 3/13/13 8:07 AM, Bruce Ashfield wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com> wrote:
>> I have someone who is trying to use update-alternatives with kernel modules.
>>
>> They discovered that the rename code changes the name of the module to end
>> in .ko.${BPN}.  While the package.bbclass code specifically looks for the
>> file name to end in '.ko' in order to avoid stripping the modules... so of
>> course the modules get stripped and no longer work properly.
>>
>> So my question is, is it even reasonable to use update-alternatives with
>> kernel modules?  If it is, we probably need to change the trigger in
>> packages.bbclass to look for either .ko or .ko.${BPN} (or something
>> similar).
>>
>> Any comments/suggestions?
>
> I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around what they are trying
> to achieve. Can you describe it from a non-packaging point of view ?
>
> i.e. do they have two kernel modules that provide the same sort of
> services to the kernel and they want to switch between the two of
> them based on the alternatives mechanism ?

Yes, that is exactly it.  For some reason they have two kernel modules that have 
the same name, same external behavior.. but internally there are code changes. 
Using the update-alternatives mechanism they have selected one version is 
"better" then the other.

(Frankly this seems bogus to me.. which is why I'm asking the question.  Is this 
even supported or is this simply "don't do that".)

--Mark

> Cheers,
>
> Bruce
>
>> --Mark
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Openembedded-core mailing list
>> Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
>> http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
>
>
>