[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230714140551.GK9196@kitsune.suse.cz>
Date: Fri, 14 Jul 2023 16:05:51 +0200
From: Michal Suchánek <msuchanek@...e.de>
To: Michal Koutný <mkoutny@...e.com>
Cc: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...i.de>, linux-modules@...r.kernel.org,
Takashi Iwai <tiwai@...e.com>,
Lucas De Marchi <lucas.de.marchi@...il.com>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.com>,
Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>,
Nathan Chancellor <nathan@...nel.org>,
Nick Desaulniers <ndesaulniers@...gle.com>,
Nicolas Schier <nicolas@...sle.eu>,
linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] depmod: Handle installing modules under a prefix
Hello,
On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 03:59:17PM +0200, Michal Koutný wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 14, 2023 at 03:38:18PM +0200, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...i.de> wrote:
> > Ok, so if the problem statement is that hardcoded paths are bad, then why
> > continue to hardcode the "/lib/modules" fragment? Just make it so that
> > KERNEL_MODULE_PREFIX can be set to the exact string "/usr/lib/modules" and not
> > just "/usr".
>
> That sounds cleaner but I'm worried it would be a BC break in setups
> that expect the existing layout under INSTALL_MOD_PATH, wouldn't it?
It's a break either way, the expected directory righ now is exactly
/lib/modules. /usr/lib/modules works to some extent for some use cases
only when the compatibility symlink lib -> usr/lib is present.
Thanks
Michal
Powered by blists - more mailing lists