Re: Things we need from sid
On Thu, Jan 24, 2002 at 07:59:52PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Anthony Towns <aj@azure.humbug.org.au> wrote:
> >> kernel-image-2.4.17-bf2.4
> >> pcmcia-modules-2.4.17-bf2.4
> > So are these an official part of boot-floppies? Should they be being
> > (co?)maintained by Herbert to keep them in sync with the other kernels?
> I would be happy to do so if someone can show me why we really need 2.4
> boot floppies on i386. So far, the only reasons I've seen are:
> 1. Support for new hardware.
> 2. Support for ext3/reiserfs.
The main part about using 2.4 for this rather than 2.2+patches is just
that: it's "better" to use an integrated kernel than maintaining our
own patches if we can. RAID is also one of the things you can only do
with this flavour (and the flavours it's meant to replace). Is there any
particular reason to prefer the 2.2+patches flavours if the 2.4 flavour
is working?
> 3. Better support for auxiliary hardware such as sound cards.
4. Avoiding people whining about how Debian still lives in the dark ages
by only shipping a 2.2 kernel.
Yes, I realise these people are wrong on a number of counts (2.4 isn't
really stable enough for us, for a start; and that there's a huge
difference between not installing it by default and not shipping it),
but it'll still probably be the number one complaint if we don't have
a 2.4 b-f's flavour.
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
The daffodils are coming. Are you?
linux.conf.au, February 2002, Brisbane, Australia
--- http://linux.conf.au/
Reply to: