Re: Dependencies on kernel-image-x.y [was: NPTL support in kernel 2.4 series]
On 2005-01-22 Martin Kittel <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> B) most people compile their own kernels and don't bother registering
> those with dpkg, e.g. via kernel-package, and therefore their systems,
> -while actually running a suitable kernel- do not provide the required
> virtual package.
> With A) I absolutely agree, but I think B) is not a valid objection to
> having a dependency on kernel-image-x.y, especially since it is very
> easy to create a custom kernel package with kernel-package. Also the
> reasoning of B) could be applied to any package, starting with
> java2-runtime and then going all the way to libc.
Which is exactly why I did not tell you "most people compile their
own kernels with make install", but "installing their own kernels with
make install is traditionally accepted practice." Other people told you
the same thing.
"See, I told you they'd listen to Reason," [SPOILER] Svfurlr fnlf,
fuhggvat qbja gur juveyvat tha.
Neal Stephenson in "Snow Crash"