129960 2006-04-14 09:54 0000 unionfs-1.1.4r install paths? (regarding kernel-module and utils) 2006-05-09 15:00:29 0000 1 1 1 Unclassified Gentoo Linux Ebuilds 2006.0 All Other RESOLVED FIXED P2 trivial --- 1 deepee@gmx.net satya@gentoo.org al3xxx@gmail.com kernel@gentoo.org deepee@gmx.net 2006-04-14 09:54:08 0000 after "emerge unionfs-1.1.x" the unionfs.ko goes into: /lib/modules/KERN_VER/fs/unionfs.ko shouldn't its destination directory preferable be: /lib/modules/KERN_VER/kernel/fs/unionfs/unionfs.ko ? A "manuall" installation (e.g. 1.1.4, without ebuilds running "patch-kernel.sh" and "genkernel oder make modules" right after) causes unionfs.ko to be placed in: /lib/modules/KERN_VER/kernel/fs/unionfs/unionfs.ko In my opinion the paths should be as "standardised/similar" as possible. This avoids perhabs strange effects, caused by having accidently two nearly the same unionfs.ko's lying around when using ebuild- and from-source-installation-methode. ;-) Similar question regarding the unionfs-utils' installation dierctory: unionfs-utils' (e.g. unionctl) are installed into "/usr/sbin". Would'nt it be better to install them directly under /sbin. For example I'm using a unionfs'd initramfs that layers rootfs: so, right after mounting the "/" the directory (partition) /usr/sbin is not available --> managing unions without a mounted /usr-partition will fail... Thanks a lot! al3xxx@gmail.com 2006-05-08 16:40:49 0000 Created an attachment (id=86452) Unionfs kernel module installation ebuild patch Could be easily solved by MODULE_NAMES ebuild patch. See attachment satya@gentoo.org 2006-05-09 02:34:06 0000 Goods points. @alex: you should read ' MODULE_NAMES="unionfs(kernel/fs/${PN}:)" '. (thanks) Binaries in ${ROOT}/sbin also (1.1.4-r2, just resync the tree) al3xxx@gmail.com 2006-05-09 15:00:29 0000 Chrisitan: Just looked into my /lib/modules/$KV_VER and found there video/nvidia.ko and net/wireless with iee80211.... May be "adding some intellect" to linux-mod.eclass as of to where put the 3rd party modules is not that bad an idea - I'm not sure if putting drivers outside of kernel/drivers/... subtree breaks autoload functionality, but even if not placing drivers where they belongs looks much more cleaner, what do you think? 86452 2006-05-08 16:40 0000 Unionfs kernel module installation ebuild patch unionfs.patch text/plain LS0tIC91c3IvcG9ydGFnZS9zeXMtZnMvdW5pb25mcy91bmlvbmZzLTEuMS40LXIyLmVidWlsZCAy MDA2LTA0LTI3IDA3OjAxOjM1LjAwMDAwMDAwMCAtMDcwMA0KKysrIC91c3IvbG9jYWwvcG9ydGFn ZS9zeXMtZnMvdW5pb25mcy91bmlvbmZzLTEuMS40LXIyLmVidWlsZCAgIDIwMDYtMDUtMDUgMDQ6 MDM6MzguMDAwMDAwMDAwIC0wNzAwDQpAQCAtMTQsNyArMTQsNyBAQA0KIHBrZ19zZXR1cCgpIHsN CiAgICAgICAgbGludXgtbW9kX3BrZ19zZXR1cA0KIA0KLSAgICAgICBNT0RVTEVfTkFNRVM9InVu aW9uZnMoZnM6KSINCisgICAgICAgTU9EVUxFX05BTUVTPSJ1bmlvbmZzKGtlcm5lbC9mczopIg0K ICAgICAgICBCVUlMRF9UQVJHRVRTPSJhbGwiDQogICAgICAgIEJVSUxEX1BBUkFNUz0iTElOVVhT UkM9JHtLVl9ESVJ9IEtFUk5FTFZFUlNJT049JHtLVl9NQUpPUn0uJHtLVl9NSU5PUn0iDQogfQ==