[arch-dev-public] Consensus: DKMS modules

Pierre Schmitz pierre at archlinux.de
Tue Mar 15 16:16:44 UTC 2016

On 15.03.2016 01:06, Allan McRae wrote:
> On 14/03/16 09:07, Allan McRae wrote:
>> On 13/03/16 00:52, Sébastien Luttringer wrote:
>>> Please note that as an ideal target, I would have all our kernel 
>>> modules
>>> available via dkms _and_ via prebuilt modules for each kernel flavor 
>>> we
>>> provide. I read on the dev IRC that few modules could only be shipped 
>>> from
>>> sources. Not sure of that btw.
>>> For example, we could, for simplicity says that we provide pre-built 
>>> modules
>>> only for the main kernel and dkms for all others kernels.
>>> What I would like is a team consensus/decision on how we handle 
>>> kernel oot
>>> modules not complains directed on virtualbox only.
>> I vote for binary modules for all kernels in [core] and dkms versions.
>> Kernels outside of [core] can have binary modules provided at the
>> maintainer's choice.
> We are going to need more opinions here to build a consensus...
> A

I agree. There is no point in having every user building the exact same 
module on every update. That's why we package precompiled packages. This 
looks more like a workaround of how kernel and module updates are 
handled atm. E.g. the kernel stays in testing for a long time and is not 
put into staging first so packagers can rebuild their modules.



Pierre Schmitz, https://pierre-schmitz.com

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list