On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 10:31:46AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Tue, Apr 24, 2001 at 05:26:27PM -0700, Aaron Lehmann wrote: > > Ok, so why did this come up at all in the discussion of the kernel > > package bloat? It seems to me that providing optimized kernels is a > > Because someone asked why the kernel-headers necessary. Their > presence allows both our module maintainers and other maintainers > to compile modules easily. It doesn't mean that they will. But it > certainly makes it a lot more likely.
no, it makes it a lot less likely. a person/company producing a binary kernel module is FAR more likely to create one for debian if they only have to create one module, rather than a dozen or so. even if they can be bothered putting in the effort to figure out exactly what kernel-headers package(s) and how it all works, they need installed it's still a lot more work to produce and support a dozen versions(*) of their module rather than just one. (*) per kernel version that they choose to support. > You seem to be confusing the kernel-header discussion with the > kernel-image discussion. Please go back and reread the thread. they're one and the same. "kernel-{image,headers} package bloat" has been the topic of this thread from the beginning. craig -- craig sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> GnuPG Key: 1024D/CD5626F0 Key fingerprint: 9674 7EE2 4AC6 F5EF 3C57 52C3 EC32 6810 CD56 26F0