on Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 04:10:49PM -0500, David Z Maze ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Bill Moseley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So is the purpose of initrd to have a small kernel but be able to
load whatever modules might be needed for the currently running
hardware?
Almost. You also get to
On Saturday 06 December 2003 08:09, Karsten M. Self wrote:
The _other_ advantage, though of a compile-in-what-you-need kernel
is that you can then turn _off_ loadable module support. For
highly sensitive servers in hostile-facing environments, this can
eliminate an entire class of potential
Harshwardhan Nagaonkar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, does this mean that I can compile my kernel without initrd, and it
will still not break on debian? I understand that this will involve
editing /etc/lilo.conf and getting rid of the initrd line. Any other
gotchas that I should know about?
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 10:43:43AM -0500, David Z Maze wrote:
Harshwardhan Nagaonkar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, does this mean that I can compile my kernel without initrd, and it
will still not break on debian? I understand that this will involve
editing /etc/lilo.conf and getting rid
Bill Moseley wrote:
So is the purpose of initrd to have a small kernel but be able to load
whatever modules might be needed for the currently running hardware?
If so I often wonder why that's needed -- that is, why not just build
a kernel with everything compiled in? If, say, installing from
Bill Moseley [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 10:43:43AM -0500, David Z Maze wrote:
Yes, that's right. The important thing is that you need to make sure
the drivers for your root disk and filesystem (probably IDE disk and
ext2, but these could both be other things) are
And thus we see that David Z Maze said, :
Harshwardhan Nagaonkar [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
So, does this mean that I can compile my kernel without initrd, and it
will still not break on debian? I understand that this will involve
editing /etc/lilo.conf and getting rid of the initrd line. Any other
Bill Moseley wrote:
Once again I'm not clear about a security posting.
Wichert's post about the Debian hacked machines and the integer overflow
in the Kernel talks about the 2.4.18 source package being updated.
But my machines are all using the package:
kernel-source-2.4.20 - Linux
And thus we see that Bob Proulx said, :
Bill Moseley wrote:
snip
If you cannot wait then you would need to compile the 2.4.23 kernel
yourself. That was released only three days ago and has not
I'm trying to take this route of compiling the vanilla kernel myself.
I've compiled the kernel many
And thus we see that Harshwardhan Nagaonkar said, :
And thus we see that Bob Proulx said, :
Bill Moseley wrote:
snip
If you cannot wait then you would need to compile the 2.4.23 kernel
yourself. That was released only three days ago and has not
snip
I'm trying to take this route of compiling the
Op wo 03-12-2003, om 01:18 schreef Harshwardhan Nagaonkar:
So, does this mean that I can compile my kernel without initrd, and it
will still not break on debian?
Yes indeed. But make sure that if the initrd was using modules that were
needed to get the system going, for instance lvm support,
And thus we see that Benedict Verheyen said, :
Op wo 03-12-2003, om 01:18 schreef Harshwardhan Nagaonkar:
snip
Yes indeed. But make sure that if the initrd was using modules that were
needed to get the system going, for instance lvm support, you will have
to use a kernel with initrd support. Most
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 12:51:14 -0800, Bill Moseley wrote:
Wichert's post about the Debian hacked machines and the integer overflow
in the Kernel talks about the 2.4.18 source package being updated.
But my machines are all using the package:
kernel-source-2.4.20 - Linux kernel source for
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 10:44:15PM +0100, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) wrote:
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 12:51:14 -0800, Bill Moseley wrote:
Wichert's post about the Debian hacked machines and the integer overflow
in the Kernel talks about the 2.4.18 source package being updated.
But my machines are
On Mon, Dec 01, 2003, at 14:40 -0800, Bill Moseley wrote:
And that was my previous question. Would 2.4.23 have *all* the
Debian patches the kernel-source-2.4.20 refers to?
Yes. This issue was fixed in the upstream 2.4.23 kernel, so compiling
your own kernel from the stable vanilla sources
15 matches
Mail list logo
