Le Mardi 23 Septembre 2003 18:21, Steve Greenland a écrit : > On 22-Sep-03, 14:14 (CDT), Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> wrote: > > It's a well accepted fact among kernel developers that vanilla > > kernel.org kernels should not be used by end users. Debian has to > > patch the kernel, too. There isn't much choice. > > Agreed, but there's a significant difference between including bug fixes > and de-facto required architecture-specific updates and including a > completely new subsystem backported from 2.5 yet calling it 2.4. For > $DIETY's sake, we keep ALSA as a separate patch/module, why is putting > in IPSEC justified? i agree with that what i like most in debian is the kernel-patch-<xxx> system, i regulary build freeswan, mppe enabled kernel and the 2.422 i am testing now give me loots of problems. i surely will prefer a separate kernel-patch-ipsec package an if not possible at least two patch files in the kernel 2.4.22 package, one with all the classical bits like bigmem etc.. and one other with the ipsec patch so we can desactive this one if needed. thanks -- OpenSides sprl Free Software Specialist Benoit Mortier - Linux Engineer
Attachment:
pgpVPLxpJX7Ls.pgp
Description: signature