1 |
All, |
2 |
|
3 |
in preparation to unmask udev-181, it was brought to my attention that a |
4 |
number of packages in the tree have direct dependencies on |
5 |
module-init-tools. Udev-181 requires kmod, which is a replacement for |
6 |
module-init-tools. |
7 |
|
8 |
I have added virtual/modutils to the tree which as of now prefers |
9 |
module-init-tools over kmod. |
10 |
|
11 |
The dependencies on module-init-tools in the tree should be changed to |
12 |
virtual/modutils. I am willing to do this myself if no one objects. If I |
13 |
do, should I open individual bugs for the packages? |
14 |
|
15 |
Also, this brings up another question. I replaced module-init-tools in |
16 |
the system set with virtual/modutils. But, since it is possible to have |
17 |
a linux system with a monolithic kernel, should this even be in the |
18 |
system set? If not, once the dependencies are correct, I propose |
19 |
dropping virtual/modutils from the system set. |
20 |
|
21 |
On the other hand, if we want virtual/modutils in the system set, there |
22 |
should be no dependencies in the tree on virtual/modutils. |
23 |
|
24 |
Thoughts? |
25 |
|
26 |
William |