UKI: document where UKI addons provided via package should be #91
Conversation
esposem
force-pushed
the
addons
branch
2 times, most recently
from
a14194d
to
703c5ce
Compare
|
Pushed the new text, but still we don't have agreement regarding where to put the addons, so this PR is going on draft until that is not decided. Once decided, I just need to change the path in the text. |
esposem
changed the title
esposem
changed the title
esposem
changed the title
|
So to sum up: |
|
modules is a directory owned by kernel packages, adding an extra.d is too generic, the name needs to be more specific |
I'll go with |
|
Looks good to me, but
seems to still be missing? |
|
Apologies. I was sure I pushed :( |
|
So the chosen dirs make sense to me, I am not yet in love with the text though. i.e. it starts out with covering EFI addons and sysexts and then uses the word "addons" for both, even though we (at least from a systemd pov) just use the word "addon" for the EFI PE wrapped thingies, and treat "sysext" and "confext" as something separated (since they are GPT wrapped thingies). Hence, I think we should make clear initially that this spec covers all three, and then should continue to generically talk about them as "auxiliary resources" or some generic term like that. but the spec should document the right suffix for each:
|
specs/unified_kernel_image.md
Outdated
| * for PE addons is `*.addon.efi` | ||
| * for sysext DDIs is `*.sysext.raw` | ||
| * for confext DDIs is `*.confext.raw` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| * for PE addons is `*.addon.efi` | |
| * for sysext DDIs is `*.sysext.raw` | |
| * for confext DDIs is `*.confext.raw` | |
| * for PE addons it is `*.addon.efi` | |
| * for sysext DDIs it is `*.sysext.raw` | |
| * for confext DDIs it is `*.confext.raw` |
or maybe better
| * for PE addons is `*.addon.efi` | |
| * for sysext DDIs is `*.sysext.raw` | |
| * for confext DDIs is `*.confext.raw` | |
| * `*.addon.efi`, for PE addons, | |
| * `*.sysext.raw`, for sysext DDIs, and | |
| * `*.confext.raw` for confext DDIs. |
While at it, you can also drop the double the second newline after this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The paragraph is now missing any reference to the version format spec. While I agree that we need to find a wording, that cannot be misunderstood as this needing to be a versioned file name and can be something like machineid (though that's valid under the version format spec), we need to be clear, that the name must be valid under the spec, e.g. not use characters disallowed by it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am afraid that I wouldn't know what to write here. I personally think that the sentence I had initially was good, just as in the UKI name, so if you have any proposal feel free to write it here.
Looks like default is now /usr/lib/modules: uapi-group/specifications#91 Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <eesposit@redhat.com>
According with
systemd/systemd#29372 (comment)