Re: Kernel Recompile
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> wrote:
> Well, if they install a Debian packaed kernel source package, it is
> documented in there. It is documented in the kernel-package package.
> If you wish, I shall even add it to the kernel-image package, about
> what one should do to upgrade the kernel the debian way.
I think it should be mentioned each of these places and in modutils
> I have no objection to having the priority of kernel-package be
> raised to standard for a Debian system. However, I can't really
> propose this, since I am far from being unbiased; and I suspect one
> would have t fight tooth and nail against people who prefer compiling
> their kernel the good, old fashioned way, just like grandpa. Not a
> fight I feel like fighting.
I don't care if it's standard or not. However, if other debian packages
depend on this package in some fashion (and near as I can tell, every
debian package which deals with modules does), they should document its
existence (probably by suggesting it).
I don't care if people actually use the code in the package to build
kernel images or not. However, I feel that what the code does should be
documented, so that those who feel the urge to do it manually can be
referred to the documentation. Unfortunately, with the current state of
affairs, such folk have a valid objection.
I don't think this needs to turn into a policy issue, but then other
issues which I'd consider less worthy (emacs oriented stuff) have had
more thorough documentation, and are better represented across packages.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to firstname.lastname@example.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact email@example.com