Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5

To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
Subject: Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5
From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
Date: Tue, 23 Feb 2010 09:40:10 -0600
Message-id: <[🔎] 4B83F6DA.60607@hardwarefreak.com>
In-reply-to: <[🔎] 201002230722.22412.bss@iguanasuicide.net>
References: <[🔎] 92e02fab1002212001s5e22932crd4a2bd9b3b084709@mail.gmail.com> <[🔎] 201002221301.39308.bss@iguanasuicide.net> <[🔎] 4B83A91B.8040703@hardwarefreak.com> <[🔎] 201002230722.22412.bss@iguanasuicide.net>

Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. put forth on 2/23/2010 7:22 AM:

> While it could happen in the future, there's no system in place (AFAIK) for 
> the system to recommend certain packages based on the user's hardware profile.  
> It is very easy to be missing the firmware because you a missing a package.

Yeah, no kidding.  It's a crappy system.  Layers of additional complexity
and breakage just to deal with the politics of "free".  This is one of the
many reasons I roll my own kernels from kernel.org source.  I love Debian,
but I don't care for the Debian kernels.  But I'm getting OT now, and this
thread needs to die.

-- 
Stan

Reply to:

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5
  - From: "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss@iguanasuicide.net>

References:
- Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5
  - From: Peter Tenenbaum <quarkpt@gmail.com>
- Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5
  - From: "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss@iguanasuicide.net>
- Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5
  - From: Stan Hoeppner <stan@hardwarefreak.com>
- Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5
  - From: "Boyd Stephen Smith Jr." <bss@iguanasuicide.net>

Prev by Date: Re: how to convince that debian is one the three major choices for a stable server environment?
Next by Date: Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5
Previous by thread: Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5
Next by thread: Re: Correct binary for Intel Core i5
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread