[Rpm-ecosystem] Writing a dnf plugin to better deal with out of tree kernel modules

Florian Festi ffesti at redhat.com
Thu Oct 6 10:26:56 UTC 2016

On 10/06/2016 12:16 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Actually is this really DNF issue?
> DNF resolves the dependencies properly and installs what can be
> installed. E.g. it keeps the kernel-core-4.6.1-1 which is compatible
> with the module on the system as long as the module is installed, while
> nothing prohibits installation of more recent kernel.
> The problem is that the default boot loader entry is modified. Or that
> kernel is blindly trying to load inappropriate modules.

I disagree. It is the job of dnf and rpm to make sure all the desired
packages get installed and having the matching modules installed with
the new kernel is clearly what is the right thing to do here. Arguing
from an "but rpm (and dnf) follow the rules of the dependencies" POV
does not cut it here. The question is how to craft the rules in a way
they produce the desired result.

If the module is not installed with the kernel no one is going to
install it later, so having a smarter script for updating the boot
loader won't cut it either.



Red Hat GmbH, http://www.de.redhat.com/, Registered seat: Grasbrunn,
Commercial register: Amtsgericht Muenchen, HRB 153243,
Managing Directors: Paul Argiry, Charles Cachera, Michael Cunningham,
Michael O'Neill

More information about the Rpm-ecosystem mailing list