* Martin Pitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030922 10:40]: > Speaking as an user, it is perfectly okay and desirable to have a > _default_ installation Debian kernel which is patched (security, ALSA, > whatever). Those users who don't care or don't know about kernel > compiling issues will rest in peace and will benefit from updated > packages from time to time. > > But as soon as I plan to compile a kernel by myself, I expect that the > content delivers what its label promises! Thats a matter of principle, > not a matter of measure. "yeah, but look at distribution xyz, they do > it even worse" is IMHO not the best approach, Debian should not clone > other's faults but try to be better.
Speaking as a user, too, I want something I can compile a kernel from. I'm no kernel hacker and do not intend to become one. Thus I see absolutely no reason, why I should want a debian-package with a unmodified source-tree. Escecially as an unmodified source-tree is in my experience almost only useful for i386. (Perhaps getting better in the last time, but anything not a debian kernel used to be even a larger nightmare than the debian-kernels). So your complain reduces in my eyes to an incomplete label. I personally think not having the term "linux" in it more of an issue than having "-debian" in it... Hochachtungsvoll, Bernhard R. Link -- Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA.