Re: a kernel plan for sarge and beyond ...
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 18:36:52 -0500, Joey Hess wrote:
> Andres Salomon wrote:
>> Right. My suggestion doesn't address d-i issues. We have two
>> options, it seems; the modules that are downloaded from a debian mirror
>> can either be versioned to support multiple ABIs (either by package name,
>> or by including multiple versions of modules in the package)
> This still requires tracking ABIs. As far as I can understand, your
> suggestion was to give up on tracking kernel ABI changes between any
> two uploads of the kernel.
That's correct; this option is the one I'd rather not pursue, if
>> downloading module source along w/ a compiler, and building them during
> Some third party modules may be necessary for things like disk drive
> support or ethernet support. Before these are available, d-i has only an
> initrd available; d-i already brely fits on lower memory machines (32 mb
> or so); I hope you're not suggesting we run gcc there. Even a minimal
> compiler seems like quite a stretch, even assuming it would work.
Wishful thinking on my part, I guess. A minimal compiler would still
require kernel-headers, which would take up a significant amount of space
(25MB for 2.6.10).