Re: Should we drop non-SMP ia64 kernel images?
On Tue, 2005-09-27 at 12:44 -0700, Richard Harke wrote:
> On Tue September 27 2005 11:00, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> > On Tue, 27 Sep 2005, Sven Luther wrote:
> > > Do you mean that kexec doesn't work in SMP situations ? I am not sure
> > > what you mean about test situations and the SMP kernel should work just
> > > well in virtualized environments, but i have some trouble equating ia64
> > > machines with low memory situations :)
> > The new kernel started with kexec for debugging purposes may need to be
> > simple and small. AFAIK the amount of memory for the second kernel is
> > limited. Virtualization of SMP environments is pretty complex. In
> > many situations its just nice to have a UP kernel around.
> I have a zx2000 running debian. I don't mind if there is no deb package
> for the UP version but if I install the kernel source and do my own build,
> I would like the UP option to build.
I agree. I think that failure to build a non-SMP kernel would be a bug
in the linux-source package. But, unlike a FTBFS bug, I don't think it
should be release critical.