[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]


On Sunday 31 October 2004 19:10, Glyn Tebbutt wrote:
> I tend to agree, why would the kernel developers go though such alot of
> work just for graphics on boot, which not all users are going to use *ie
> server users, what need is there?, esp on headless machines* The reality
> is, any sort of splash is going to be more of a powerusers thing, as it
> could cause headaches with stablity down the line. And after all we all
> know debian is about stability. Also i dont think its likly that there
> will be 2 different kernel tracks. 1 for normal debian kernels and
> another for debsplash.
> Im unsure to be honest.

Yes it is true, but...
Really debsplash is not an alone project, there are a lot of them that need a 
kernel patch (like vesa-tng or some patches for enable hight ram size) that a 
desktop user should have. This is not a standalone project. I started 
debsplash as a project under debian-desktop, after i'll start some other 
project to make debian good for desktop users.
The kernel patch doesn't need userspace if it doesn't work, so the patch can 
be inside the kernel without using it, without any problem.
Just to know, there are some patches that are not included in the prestine 
kernel but you can find in the debian kernel. Why?
Really there are a set of patches that are included by kernel mainteiners, 
probably in the kernel that you are using you have these, but you are not 
using them.
The question is another: is right to keep one kernel for server and desktop 


Attachment: pgpnjBnOVio2E.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: