GNU bug report logs - #45403
[PATCH] gnu: zfs: Split into packages specific for each of our major supported kernel versions.

Previous Next

Full log

Message #14 received at 45403 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: raid5atemyhomework <raid5atemyhomework <at> protonmail.com>
To: "45403 <at> debbugs.gnu.org" <45403 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] gnu: zfs: Split into packages specific for each of our
 major supported kernel versions.
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 01:12:12 +0000

> There are primarily two ways to use Guix with a local Git repo.
>
> First, you can follow the instructions in the manual section Contributing, specifically the sections Building from Git and RunningGuix Before It Is Installed.
>
> Or, you can use something like `guix pull --url=/path/to/my/repo --commit=mycommit`.

Thank you very much, will check.

> Beyond that, does this patch create linux-libre packages with ZFS support compiled in?

No, this patch continues to use the existing technique of downloading ZFS as source and compiling it as a kernel module you have to load in, as per licensing incompatibility.

What it changes is that it compiles kernel modules for all guix-provided kernel versions that ZFS currently is rated to support, rather than compile a kernel module for whatever `(default-linux)` is, which is always the latest and greatest kernel (currently 5.10) which ZFS is currently not rated for.

As Guix goes through the trouble of maintaining a `linux-libre-4.4` package I assume at least one user somewhere is using Linux 4.4, and did not want to prevent that user from using ZFS if they decide to do so someday.

I admit the naming scheme `linux-5.9-zfs` does make it seem like the package contains an entire Linux kernel.
The alternative is to call it `zfs-for-linux-5.9` but that makes the entire package name with version `zfs-for-linux-5.9-0.8.5` which I think is worse, because the version numbers are right next to each other.
What naming scheme would you suggest?

* `linux-5.9-zfs` --- makes it look like it contains a whole Linux kernel.
* `zfs-for-linux-5.9` --- versions are right next to each other: `zfs-for-linux-5.9-0.8.5`, this is bad since some versioning conventions include a `-` in the version naming, so at a glance this makes for a very confusing version.
* `kernelmodule-5.9-zfs` --- makes it clear that it is not an entire kernel, but this package *also* includes userspace utilities not just the kernel module.
* `zfs-for-linux-5.9-version` --- kind of a weird and absurdly lengthy name but maybe palatable?

I imagine a similar problem would occur for other kernel modules --- the internal kernel interfaces are *not* stable at all, so complex external kernel modules like ZFS need to know what kernel version it's being compiled for and include a bunch of `#ifdef`s to compensate.
So we need some decent convention for "how do we name kernel modules so that they are targeted for each kernel version".

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.