Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!
On Sun, Sep 21, 2003 at 05:05:46PM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Mark Brown <broonie@sirena.org.uk> [2003.09.21.1644 +0200]:
> > effects (better hardware support, more features, better
> > performance or what have we) are generally seen to be worthwhile.
> ... in addition to possibly more bugs and the inability of
> interaction with the kernel and the rest of the world. linux-kernel
Well, yes. This is one reason for not just slinging in any old patches
and being willing to provide support for the kernel you ship. Things
like 2.5 backports are reasonably safe even if they introduce ABI
changes, for example - the kernel maintainers have made some commitment
to providing that ABI already.
> I am not saying that all this shouldn't happen. I am just saying it
> shouldn't be the default. Debian is about choice, isn't it? Well,
> opt-in choice it should be!
Well, what you seem to want is to have the kernel source avaliable in a
format that makes packaging kernel patches easy. That seems like a
different issue to me.
--
"You grabbed my hand and we fell into it, like a daydream - or a fever."
Reply to: