Johnny Hughes wrote: > ----------------------------------- > There are 3 options here: > > 1. Patch CentOS-4 yum to make yum install all kernel-*-devel files like > it does for kernel-devel (or the reverse ... make kernel-devel and > upgrade like the other files). kernel-devel should be installed alongside, not upgraded. So if you have kernel-a kernel-devel-a installed and do a yum update, you should end up with kernel-a kernel-b kernel-devel-a kernel-devel-b installed on your machine, for example if you have to go back one kernel as a module you need doesn't compile on kernel-b. If you didn't have kernel-devel-a anymore at that point, that could get quite ugly. > 2. Modify the kernel-2.6.spec to do what FC >= 4 does. I am against changing the kernel spec file. To clear up what Fedora did with their kernels: Have each kernel-devel package (kernel-devel, kernel-smp-devel, kernel-xen0-devel) also Provide: kernel-devel. This way yum sorts out that all kernel-*-devel need to be installed instead of upgraded. > 3. Do nothing and tell people to choose what they want by updating this > variable in /etc/yum.conf > > installonlyn= Bad idea (even if you mean installonlypkg here). It's no consistent behaviour, if kernel-devel gets installed and all other kernel-*-devel packages get updated. By the way: If we change yum according to 1), people using the installonlyn plugin will get the kernel-*-devel package removed, when the corresponding kernel package gets removed by the package. > If there is no discussion of this item on this list by non-centos > developers, then I will revert back to making bug changes based on only > what the developers think :P Hehe. Cheers, Ralph -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 251 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20061022/5112060c/attachment-0007.sig>