Re: kernel-{image,headers} package bloat
On Thursday 26 April 2001 08:20, Craig Sanders wrote:
> the point at issue is whether there should be dozens of kernel-image and
> kernel-headers packages when one is enough to do the job.
I'm just a humble Linux-user, but still compile my own kernel. However, I do
this because I'm also a control-freak, and I like to know what is compiled
into it. I also like to decide /what/ modules I have, instead of everything.
But that's me.
If I understand this correctly, Herbert Xu wants to provide alternate
kernel-* to make it easier for users to run a better suited kernel. However,
doesn't that require the user to know more about his system? I would argue in
/favor/ of the kernel-{helper,custom} package, since if you wanted to use a
custom kernel, you still had to use apt/dselect/whatever to find the correct
image for your system. And if you /REALLY/ want those last drops of
performance, you still need to be something of a wizzard, using powertweak,
or /proc-hacks, or whatever.
If instead, you were able to type something akin to "update-kernel" or
whatever, and then have a kernel built suited to your arch, but with the
"default" Debian-options (ie. lotsa modules), wouldn't that be better? I
mean, just make a note to the user, to switch to another console, or minimize
the window in case of X. Then he'll get a kernel freshly built. IMHO, that's
much better. It also means that they only have to download a small update
each time there's a new kernel-release, instead of several megabytes. Dial-up
users should love this.
In the end, I am not sure this matters. Herbert seems to have set his mind
pretty strongly on this. I can't speak on behalf of him, of course, but it
seems that "multiple flavours" are here to stay, for better or for worse...
Regards
Kenneth
Reply to: