>>> There is a discrepancy in the terminology of these two
packages:
>>> - kernel-drivers[1]
>>> - kernel-modules-extra
>>>
>>> Are these[1] modules passed the driving test?
>>> Should I read the "Banana Split" thread, again?
>>> Perhaps the "kernel-modules" for the "kernel-drivers" is
the proper name.
>>
>>
>> I should have brought that up when the split was first proposed, but I
>> agree and I do not like this inconsistency. The new one should be
>> called kernel-modules, or the old kernel-modules-extra should be
>> renamed kernel-drivers-extra.
Right. This kind of thing is why I let it sit for review for over a
month. Now it's live in Rawhide and doing a rename means you have to
get all the Provides/Obsoletes in place to kill off the old subpackage
name. In other words, it's a PITA.
I avoiding bringing that up originally as I didn't want to get into a
discussion about the colour of the bike shed.
Or, I may just do the rename and people that have the existing
subpackage installed can deal with it manually.
I would likely just do that, I've excluded kernels from my rawhide
updates for the moment as I suspect it'd take a few days to settle out
> I vote for kernel-modules and kernel-modules-extra, as not all
modules are
> drivers.
This is out for a vote.
Since it's now being discussed I vote for modules*
Peter