Comment # 22 on bug 1202353 from Martin Wilck

(In reply to Jiri Slaby from comment #20)
> Maybe Martin can answer comment 17 & 19?

Not sure if I'm competent to answer this. Dominique should have a say in any
case.

Does it make sense to install a kernel without s-m-t? IMO the answer is "no".
At least the modprobe.d files are necessary. (In theory we could separate them
from the scriptlets, but that's yet another topic).

Does it make sense to have s-m-t but not dracut? IMO the answer is "yes". But
s-m-t is actually unclean today, as it calls /usr/bin/dracut unconditionally
without requiring it.

Does it make sense to have a kernel but not dracut? IMO yes, if you don't
intend to update the kernel.

So my recommendation would be:

 a) the kernel adds a Requires: s-m-t because of the modprobe.conf files, and
drops the dependency on either dracut and mkinitrd.
 b) s-m-t dependencies are left as-is
 c) s-m-t calls dracut only if it exists, and prints a warning otherwise.

Of course, this would make it possible that users shoot themselves in the foot
by uninstalling dracut and then updating the kernel, but it would increase our
flexibility.

(In reply to Jiri Slaby from comment #17)
> So can we remove
>   Requires(post): mkinitrd
> from kernel spec or not? 

IMO yes

> Another question:
> should we add
>   Requires(post): suse-module-tools
> at all

No, we should add Requires: suse-module-tools (for modprobe.d) and leave the
kernel-rpm-scriptlets deps in place (for transaction ordering).

Btw: why does the kernel use run_if_exists in %preun/%postun/%posttrans but not
in %pre/%post?

Wrt comment 19, I believe for released %sle_version we shouldn't change
anything unless strictly necessary.