RE: kernel size (was: How do I get GATEWAY2000 PS/2 mouse to work?)
There probably wouldn't quite be room to include the kitchen sink. :->
IMHO, a better alternative to the large, best-endeavours kernel would be
to ship a really tight kernel and use the installation front-end to
configure additional support (in modules where possible or desirable).
Casper Boden-Cummins.
>----------
>From: David J. Evans[SMTP:d.j.evans@reading.ac.uk]
>Sent: 16 August 1996 14:12
>To: 'debian-user@lists.debian.org'
>Cc: The recipient's address is unknown.
>Subject: Re: kernel size (was: How do I get GATEWAY2000 PS/2 mouse to
>work?)
>
>
>On Thu, 15 Aug 1996 10:04:04 +0100 Casper BodenCummins
><bodec@Sherwood.co.uk> wrote:
>
>[snipped stuff about PS/2 support not being present by
>default ....]
>
>> The real question is whether the default kernel should be bloated with
>> features, or pared down.
>
>As a brand new Debian user who didn't even know how to
>spell Colonel until recently, and who has been caught out
>by the lack of PS/2 support, I'd vote for a large
>"everything and the kitchen sink" kernel to cover most
>eventualities. This will give heart to new-users and
>upgraders, and can trimmed and tweaked by the gurus.
>
>And thank you to all who responded with my "newbie"
>question about telnetting in as root to a box without a
>screen or keyboard - su and /etc/securetty were all new to
>me.
>
>David
>
>______________
>David J. Evans
>AMS, Virology Research Group, The University of Reading
>Whiteknights, P.O. Box 228, Reading RG6 6AJ
>Tel : +44 (0)118 9318893 Fax : +44 (0)118 9316537
>http://skpc10.reading.ac.uk/
>
>
>
Reply to: