Re: kernel-{image,headers} package bloat
On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:20:46PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 02:18:30AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > I could disagree pretty heavily by pointing that this would be shit as
> > it would add an hour to the install. Why not just provide a stock i386
> > kernel and let people compile it later on? Some people need to patch
> > in mm/swap patches, netfilter patches, their own hacks, etc, etc.
>
> please pay attention.
I have been, oddly enough.
> nobody (at least as far as i can tell) has suggested getting rid of the
> stock kernel-image package, so there will be no effect at all on people
> who just want to install the system and run it.
AFAIK, you suggested adding a "compile your own kernel" step at install
time. Which would be bad. AFAIK. Bear in mind "02:18:30AM +1000".
> 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 know, this is shit. Pay attention to my other postings on the other part
of this thread and you'll see.
--
Daniel Stone
daniel@kabuki.openfridge.net
Reply to: