Re: 2.2 kernel "flavors" needed for i386 -- any list?
On Sun, Dec 12, 1999 at 12:19:09PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Drew Parsons wrote:
>
> [ snip ]
>
> : The only thing against it I can think of is the length of time it takes to
> : compile the whole kernel compared with the time it takes to just compile
> : pcmcia-modules. Pcmcia seems to be updated a lot more frequently than the
> : kernel, and it could be a hassle having to recompile the entire kernel every
> : time just to update the pcmcia modules.
>
> Color me ignorant, but I don't undersand this argument. Can't you
> recompile modules without recompiling the kernel? I know I can :)
>
> It doesn't matter if the modules came bundled with the kernel source, or
> as a seperate package AFAICT ...
>
> Of course my argument is shot to hell if you aren't compling PCMCIA as
> modules. Which laptops need PCMCIA support before modules can be
> loaded?
>
No, you're right, of course, you could compile the modules separately, and I
presume this would continue to work even if the modules were originally
included with the kernel. I was just thinking over the usefulness of having
the pcmcia modules always included with the kernel. I guess it would in
fact be useful, meaning every time you update the kernel, you don't have to
update the pcmcia modules separately. They will in any case need to be
provided, bundled together or separately.
Drew
Reply to: