View Single Post
misterc's Avatar
Posts: 1,625 | Thanked: 998 times | Joined on Aug 2010
#106
Originally Posted by pali View Post
Now kernel-power has 4 major packages (needed for using):
kernel-power
kernel-power-flasher
kernel-power-modules
kernel-power-bootimg
and some more for development...

[...]
So what do you think?
i'm not much of a (kernel / OS) dev, so i'm just talking from a (SW) admin point of view, but i second Don_falcone's opinion; keep things clearly structured and leave it up to the end user to leave out what they don't want (as Estel did).

also, more from a "distribution" and SW management point of view, is it smart to change the structure of the KP (meta-)package?
i know the KP is not a "normal" package as it can not be uninstalled (or even upgraded?) thru HAM/FAM.

maybe an idea (changing strucutre) if you decide to include the KP in CSSU?