Re: To what extent should Debian modify the kernel? (Re: Debian should not modify the kernels!)
Matt Zimmerman <mdz@debian.org> wrote:
>
> So, I'm curious why you chose to make it a part of the Debian kernel source,
> rather than a separate patch (kernel-patch-ipsec or such).
Well the reason for it to be in the default kernel-source is simple:
The patch should be used on all default Debian kernel images unless
the arch maintainer chooses to override it.
> I suppose the more fundamental question is, what is your vision for the
> Debian kernel source? What do you feel belongs there, and what does not?
Perhaps vision is too strong a word.
I have some simple checks when it comes to patch inclusion:
* Is it actively maintained by someone?
If it's not maintained then there is very little chance for me to
include it as I have no time in fixing random breakages.
* If it's a feature, can it be disabled/enabled at runtime?
Sinec we're making generic kernels, this is a must. The presence
of the patch should not prevent me from doing something that I would
otherwise be able to do.
If the patch only produces a module then it obviously passes this test.
* If it's a bug fix, how bad are its side-effects?
I'm not going to accept any bug fix that makes the kernel better for
10% of the users but worse for the other 90%.
* What size impact does it have to the binary kernel image?
This is very important for the debian-boot team.
Again it would be best if it was completely modularised.
Cheers,
--
Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Reply to: