btb wrote:
On Nov 18, 2004, at 14.22, Jörg Harmuth wrote:Hi Ben,I don't know what the proper approach is, but if everything works correctly without ipv6 (I had problem without ipv6 some time ago, but I can't really recall what was up there) why not compile a kernel without ipv6 support ? This defenitely works, if it is a possibility at all. And it gives you the chance to remove more things you don't need from your kernel.what is the proper approach to achieving this?Have a nice time Joerghi joerg- thanks for replying.i did start down that road a bit - and found out i am not yet comfortable enough with that process to trust myself (very very new to debian). besides, isn't the idea of loading and unloading (or not loading) modules that you don't have to recompile your kernel for this type of thing?-ben
The greatest advantage of a modular kernel is that it is portable. Modules are necessary for 'standard kernels' as they are indented to work on a large audience. Linux becomes much more attractive to new users when they don't have to build the system themselves to get the hardware support they need. Not that modules don't provide a quicker way to 'turn off' unnecessary protocols/etc, but that was possible before modules, so it isn't likely why they were implemented. IMO, once a system is set up the novelty of modules quickly wears off, and then its time to build a kernel with the stuff thats always used built in, while the stuff that's never used is removed.
</uncessary rant in response to rhetorical question>Building the kernel can be hairy at first, but it is the best overall solution, as you can tailor everything to fit your needs. Turning off ipv6 is overall unnecessary, but since you want to anyway, its obvious you want to fine tune your system. So why not do it properly and build yourself a kernel? There are many who can and will help you on this list if you decide to and run into trouble.
Michael Spang