On 10/07/2011 12:16 PM, Jonas de Buhr wrote:
>
> out of interest: why do you have different configs? even if you have
> different hardware you could still build a "one fits all"-kernel. or
> are they that specialized?
>
We share kernel config whenever possible, but there are a few cases
where they have to diverge. Basically any option that can't be compiled
as a module is a candidate. Off the top of my head,
* We've got x86/amd64
* Intel/AMD
* A couple with RAID hardware that can't have its module installed.
* One server with a tulip NIC that can't use a particular driver.
* A set where hyperthreading needs to be disabled
* A virtual machine host that needs certain hardening features
disabled
* A separate config for VM guests
* Headless vs. GUI requires more grsec/pax tweaking
* Different HZ settings. Power management in general depends on what
the box will be doing.
* A firewall with no non-essential modules available
We keep the configs in git, so if two are similar I can usually just
pull the last changeset (after a make oldconfig) over. What sucks is
testing, and of course driving to work to reboot everything off-hours.
> lets just agree on that. im kinda tired of this discussion. there's
> nothing we can do about it anyway.
>
Agreed.
