On Thursday 26 April 2001 08:20, Craig Sanders wrote: > the point at issue is whether there should be dozens of kernel-image and > kernel-headers packages when one is enough to do the job.
I'm just a humble Linux-user, but still compile my own kernel. However, I do this because I'm also a control-freak, and I like to know what is compiled into it. I also like to decide /what/ modules I have, instead of everything. But that's me. If I understand this correctly, Herbert Xu wants to provide alternate kernel-* to make it easier for users to run a better suited kernel. However, doesn't that require the user to know more about his system? I would argue in /favor/ of the kernel-{helper,custom} package, since if you wanted to use a custom kernel, you still had to use apt/dselect/whatever to find the correct image for your system. And if you /REALLY/ want those last drops of performance, you still need to be something of a wizzard, using powertweak, or /proc-hacks, or whatever. If instead, you were able to type something akin to "update-kernel" or whatever, and then have a kernel built suited to your arch, but with the "default" Debian-options (ie. lotsa modules), wouldn't that be better? I mean, just make a note to the user, to switch to another console, or minimize the window in case of X. Then he'll get a kernel freshly built. IMHO, that's much better. It also means that they only have to download a small update each time there's a new kernel-release, instead of several megabytes. Dial-up users should love this. In the end, I am not sure this matters. Herbert seems to have set his mind pretty strongly on this. I can't speak on behalf of him, of course, but it seems that "multiple flavours" are here to stay, for better or for worse... Regards Kenneth