kernel-{image,headers} package bloat

[Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au>]

In debian-news: "Re: Running Linux 2.4.x with Debian GNU/Linux 2.2"
On Mon, Apr 16, 2001 at 02:30:43PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> [...]
>      * kernel-image-2.4.2-i386 (2.4.2-1)
>      * kernel-source-2.4.2 (2.4.2-3)
>        Binary packages:
>           + kernel-doc-2.4.2
>           + kernel-source-2.4.2
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2-386
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2-586
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2-586tsc
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2-686-smp
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2-686
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2-k6
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2-k7
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2-pentium4
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2-pentiumiii
>           + kernel-headers-2.4.2-pentiumiii-smp
>           + kernel-image-2.4.2-386
>           + kernel-image-2.4.2-586
>           + kernel-image-2.4.2-586tsc
>           + kernel-image-2.4.2-686-smp
>           + kernel-image-2.4.2-686
>           + kernel-image-2.4.2-k6
>           + kernel-image-2.4.2-k7
>           + kernel-image-2.4.2-pentium4
>           + kernel-image-2.4.2-pentiumiii
>           + kernel-image-2.4.2-pentiumiii-smp

is this kind of package bloat really necessary?

all these packages take up around 110MB, and if every kernel has the same
number of packages available (approx 25 per kernel version), will bloat
the Packages file to an absurd size.

this will waste a lot of space on mirrors, and cause dpkg to be even
slower than it already is.

what's wrong with just one kernel-image that works with all i386 clones
and the kernel source package for people to compile their own kernels?
it's worked well for us in the past.

all that's needed is one -source, one -headers, one -doc, and one -image
package.  4 packages, not 25.

craig

--
craig sanders <cas@taz.net.au>

      GnuPG Key: 1024D/CD5626F0 
Key fingerprint: 9674 7EE2 4AC6 F5EF 3C57  52C3 EC32 6810 CD56 26F0