Re: kernel modules (Re: redesigning the debian installer)
Joey Hess wrote:
> Note that I'm not opposed to websites or whatever that autobuild install
> media in the least.
> Glenn McGrath wrote:
> > Also the user building there own customised installer would logically
> > only include modules that apply to them, eg. they wouldnt include an NFS
> > modules if they dont intend to install from or too NFS, same with
> > detecting different types of hardware e.g. ISA, CDROM etc.
> My ideas on this are rather different, but are not refined yet. What I'm
> thinking about doing is making each debian-installer module include the
> kernel modules it needs (or depend on some other module that has them,
> of course).
> This means that if you are not doing a NFS install, you can just drop
> off the nfs debian-installer module from your install media. Same for a
> *lot* of other modules.
This makes sense
> > I think enabling heavy end-user customisation is the best chance we have
> > of buildign a 1 disk installer. I think it would be very challenging to
> > build a 1 disk installer for the masses if your kernel is 1MB leaving
> > 400KB left to work with, 400KB would get most of busybox in, but not
> > much else.
> But see, your kernel will be more like 300kb. It will include no drivers
> except enough to get the debian installer up and to get up on the
> All other kernel drivers and installer modules will be downloaded (hard
> disk drivers, filesystems, etc), and from that point, space metters much
> This is why I'm holding out some hope for a single floppy install,
> without excessive user customization aside from specifying that they
> want to use the single floppy to install from the network.
> The main issues this raises is that it makes kernel compilations for the
> installer a PITA (because you have to shove the kernel modules into a
> buch of different installer modules), and that it means we need an initrd
> to boot up the debian system once it is installed (because the kernel
> may not even have a disk driver or ext2 filesystem in it).
I will have to and lookup what PITA means, but i assume it means
hmm, it could get complex, installer modules depending on the used
kernel, i think this makes it more important that the end user has some
tools to customise there installer.
I think this tool will have to
a) specify what modules will be included with the installer (others can
b) build the installer modules that will be on the disk (from a module
base and kernel dependencies?)
c) Allow the user to pre-define default values for any modules.
Maybe the installer modules themselves could be virtual packages, and
the kernel modules they require could be extracted from a deb. This
would require lots of work on the kernel though.
Im a bit out of my depth on the best way to do this.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com