Re: What happened to Agnula.org (DeMuDi)?
On Fri, Mar 16, 2007 at 09:19:13PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Mar 2007, Tzafrir Cohen wrote:
> >THe problem with maintaining your own kernel is keeping up-to-date with
> >(1) security fixes
> >(2) hardware issues
> Well, in how far is this different from maintaining your own
It means I have to be a kernel specialist as well. And test kernels as
well. In practice I'll just ship the last kernel that worked for me, and
won't ship updates.
> >A slightly simpler route would be building a slightly-modified
> >linux-image package (same source, minimal code modifications).
> Sure, your kernel package could be the official kernel image + small
> diff. You might perhaps even convince the kernel maintainers to
> include this package in their builds - I never checked how hard this
> is but I'm really sure that I would have tried very hard to convince
> them before I would start my own distribution. You must know I'm
> very lazy once it comes to stupid gruntwork.
One small change: here is a snippet from the current configuration:
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_VOLUNTARY is not set
# CONFIG_PREEMPT is not set
# CONFIG_PREEMPT_BKL is not set
> >It would still break all automatically-built modules (linux-modules-extra
> >(?)), but then all users will need to do is build modules with m-a .
> Is this really the case? Why?
Naturally because Debian won't build modules for our private kernel...