TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Fedora has significantly fumbled DKMS handling for Linux kernel modules

56 pointsby pcr910303about 4 years ago

6 comments

rwmjabout 4 years ago
I think the truth here is that Fedora packagers don&#x27;t much care about out of tree kernel modules. It&#x27;s not something we spend a lot of time thinking about or discussing. I wonder what&#x27;s stopping this kernel module from going upstream? That&#x27;s the best way to resolve this. He mentions in the other blog posting that it&#x27;s an out of tree patch required to read motherboard sensors, which doesn&#x27;t sound to me like anything controversial.<p>However this does seem like it&#x27;s a bug so maybe Chris would be better off filing a Bugzilla rather than ranting. He says:<p>&gt; <i>I would file a bug report but I cannot imagine that Fedora would accept it. They already know that this feature doesn&#x27;t work</i><p>which may or may not be true (&quot;Fedora&quot; is not a monolithic entity, but a group of packagers with many different opinions). I think he should file the bug anyway, and at the same time work with the upstream kernel community to get the sensors patch into the mainline.
评论 #27262144 未加载
评论 #27263505 未加载
评论 #27266671 未加载
jforbes_fedoraabout 4 years ago
You really had me here right up until:<p>&gt; I would file a bug report but I cannot imagine that Fedora would accept it.<p>Weak modules was shipped with Fedora to allow some testing for certain scenarios as things go forward. There was already a bug filed that it took too long to run on major kernel updates, so the call to the script was removed from the kernel post. Had someone filed a bug on this, it would have been looked at as well, and likely your module would just work instead of wasting time to write a blog post about how something is broken that you can&#x27;t even be bother to file a bug over.<p>- The Fedora Kernel Maintainer who actually reads every bug filed against the Fedora kernel
评论 #27264486 未加载
cbmuserabout 4 years ago
If I’m understanding this correctly, this is actually a feature that was developed for RHEL and just happens to be enabled on Fedora by accident.<p>RHEL has a stable kernel ABI because they support third-party binary modules such as from SGI.<p>Since the kernel ABI is stable, there is no need to rebuild DKMS modules on every kernel update.<p>FWIW, Debian has a similar mechanism which uses stable kernel ABIs. That’s why a Debian kernel image has always two version numbers, one for the ABI and one for the actual kernel version.<p>DKMS modules on Debian are rebuilt only when the ABI version changes. It probably uses the same DKMS feature as RHEL, not sure.
评论 #27262749 未加载
aneutronabout 4 years ago
If this was a deliberate decision on their end, it&#x27;s just a plain bad one IMO.
评论 #27262164 未加载
cozzydabout 4 years ago
I thought fedora used akmod instead of dkms?
encryptluks2about 4 years ago
The sooner Fedora differentiates itself from Red Hat entirely, the better off it&#x27;ll be.
评论 #27263057 未加载
评论 #27262564 未加载