Re: kernel-{image,headers} package bloat
> > > this actually *helps* new users.
> >
> > Why?
>
> Because it teaches them to perform a task they should have to
> perform, at the right time. At some point, you *have* to stop tying
> your children's shoelaces, and teach them to do it for themselves.
You obviously didn't read my previous post in this thread.
Your point is ridiculous. You think linux kernel compiling is
something as fundmental as tying shoelaces. rotfl. sorry.
> > I can see your suggestion help mirrors (The trade-off is
> > questionable.) But I can't see why it could help users.
>
> Questionable?!?
Anything isn't questionable?!? ;)
> Have you seen ftp.au.d.o and mirror.aarnet.edu.au lately?
> (Admittedly, aarnet sucks and is broken half the time, but has the
> exact same breakage as ftp.au.d.o, which is normally fine). The
> mirrors which have trouble keeping up, and have out-of-sync
> packages, don't need *any* more load, least of all load like this.
Okay I have to agree I'm not very aware of the sufferings of our
mirrors. I left this for those who know better to decide.
> > I certainly don't think that make users (even make the task
> > easier) to compile a kernel can do help to most of the users (That
> > is *not* a task they should be bothered at all.) And I certainly
> > disagree that they who don't want compile a kernel don't belong to
> > our user base.
>
> There's a *reason* RedHat exists.
But that's not the reason that Debian can't do better.
> BTW, we're already asking them to understand the installer and
> dselect (and I have had to help some of my friends, all of whom who
> were very good at Linux, through this), so why not the kernel? If
> the figures Craig's throwing around of 110meg per kernel version are
> true, then that's absolutely unacceptable. Think of: out-of-sync
> mirrors (they don't need more load, or bloat to fill up the
> bandwidth and hard drives), and countries that pay by the meg for
> bandwidth.
If we have no better way to go, we educate users that computer is
dumb/stupid/dangerous/broken, take care of yourself. But this is *NOT*
something to be proud of. please.
But yes if the mirrors do suffer from this ~100M kernel packages, we
may actually have to tell our users the sad message maybe.
> Sure, I'll reconsider this argument when the new debian-installer is
> ready (which sounds great already), but right now, no way.
I guess we're not talking about installers.
The above said. I may actually agree with you, if
o the preformance difference of optimized kernel and general i386
kernel is so trivial that users can't even notice in their day to day
work.
and/or
o the hits on the mirror is untolarable technically/financially.
I won't agree the following though
o users need to be educated/trained to compile the kernel for
themselves.
the reason i've stated in my previsous posts to this thread.
--
http://dim.sourceforge.net ............... Debian Chinese Input Method
http://njlug.sourceforge.net ............ NanJing GNU/Linux User Group
http://cdlinux.sourceforge.net ........... Debian running on Live! CDs
http://people.debian.org/~zw ...................... XEmacs Screenshots
Reply to: