On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Xyne
Hi,
A naming conflict on the AUR between jme-git (JMicron Ethernet Linux driver) and jme-svn (jMonkey Engine) was recently brought to my attention. Currently, the names of kernel module packages are identical to the internal names of the modules recognized by e.g. modprobe and lsmod.
Given that libraries and modules for programming languages and other applications follow a naming scheme that includes the target application's prefix in the package name (python-foo, aspell-foo, etc.), it would be consistent to do the same with kernel modules, e.g. "linux-foo".
I understand that there are likely a lot of packages that would be affected by the adoption of such a naming scheme, but the migration could be done gradually as packages are upgraded, with "provides" entries used to satisfy dependencies during the transitional period.
Of course, a TODO list could manage this as well if you're up to it.
The guidelines would also need to be updated: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Kernel_Module_Package_Guidelines
Thoughts?
Regards, Xyne
I support a change of the module naming scheme too, having a prefix or suffix would mean less confusion. The only packages in our repos not following the current scheme are the vbox packages, they have a "-modules" suffix (virtualbox-guest-modules, virtualbox-host-modules), but "linux-*" and "linux-flavor-*" appear to be more sensible choices indeed. If we go with that change, prepending "dkms-" to dkms sources instead of appending "*-dkms" would be a good idea too ( https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Dkms#Package_name). Cheers, -- Maxime