Hi! Am 2003-09-21 13:09 +0200 schrieb martin f krafft: > If I install kernel-source-2.4.21, I want the 2.4.21 kernel source, > I don't want the 2.4.21 kernel source with 2.5's IPsec stack patched > in and hundreds of little "fixes". I fully agree with this. Speaking as an user, it is perfectly okay and desirable to have a _default_ installation Debian kernel which is patched (security, ALSA, whatever). Those users who don't care or don't know about kernel compiling issues will rest in peace and will benefit from updated packages from time to time. But as soon as I plan to compile a kernel by myself, I expect that the content delivers what its label promises! Thats a matter of principle, not a matter of measure. "yeah, but look at distribution xyz, they do it even worse" is IMHO not the best approach, Debian should not clone other's faults but try to be better. Thus, I propose: - a package kernel-debian-default (or similar), which is patched at the maintainer's will and regularly updated with new features and security patches. This is for users that don't compile their own kernels, thus the package should not contain the source code. - packages kernel-x.y.z which contains an _unmodified_ upstream kernel source; patches can be applied to it by installing kernel-patch-x.y.z-patchname (the way it currently is intended) Thanks and have a nice day! Martin -- Martin Pitt home: www.piware.de eMail: martin@piware.de
Attachment:
pgpbh9jgGT9y8.pgp
Description: PGP signature