[arch-general] Is linux extramodules dir named most appropriately?

[Eli Schwartz]

On 01/11/2018 11:27 AM, Genes Lists via arch-general wrote:
> On 1/11/18 9:45 AM, Eli Schwartz via arch-general wrote:
> ...
>>
>> Because the extramodules directory is designated for thirdparty modules
>> that are believed to be compatible with any kernel patch release of the
>> same major.minor version. If the module needs to be recompiled with
>> patch releases, it should be installed to the "main" modules directory.
>>
> 
> Terrific thank you.
> 
> Do you know where the directory removal logic is managed?
> 
> /usr/share/libalpm/60-linux.hook doesn't seem reveal much to my eye - it
> treats 4.14.13-1-ARCH and extramodules-4.14-ARCH indistinguishably. When
> linux is updated to 4.15 extramodules gets removed somehow but not with
> a minor update.

*What* directory removal logic???

pacman -Qo /usr/lib/modules/extramodules-4.14-ARCH/

Anyway, see how Red Hat uses "weak modules" in much the same way.


-- 
Eli Schwartz

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/attachments/20180111/b5e97db6/attachment.asc>