On 5/18/07, Arnaud Fortier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For exemple kernel-server could hav some ckserver patch and other "related to server" patches, the same idea for laptop / desktop. Another way could be to have a pkgbuild like the kernel26viper (on aur) or wain's one where you can select the kernel / patchsets you want, configure it and build it ? Regards Arnaud James Rayner a écrit : > On Fri, May 18, 2007 at 03:46:35AM +0800, Gan Lu wrote: > >> On Thu, 17 May 2007 09:12:06 +0200 >> Attila <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >>> On Mittwoch, 16. Mai 2007 21:17 waldek wrote: >>> >>> >>>> Let me explain then, I thought it was obvious :-) >>>> How does it compare to booting another kernel and downgrading the broken >>>> one? I don't even want to mention my dell notebook with external cd drive I >>>> can never find. >>>> IMO having two kernels is a quite clean solution but as I said that's my >>>> oppinion. I don't even want to mention finding out if some other problems >>>> are kernel related. >>>> >>> I use the same because i have had some bad experiences with the distribution >>> what i used before arch which has only one kernel package. That's why i never >>> upgrade the running kernel and reboot to an other kernel before i want to do >>> this. I think it is a risk which is not necessary instead of it seems that >>> arch devs makes a very good job. But if a kernel panic happens after an >>> upgrade and you have to solve it than from my view you don't want it a second >>> time.-) So my hope is too that kernel26ck or another kernel package what is >>> most wanted will be survive in community. >>> >>> >> Yes, I do agree. kernel-laptop -desktop -sever if you want my vote. BTW, Since we haven't supported 2.4 for a long time, why not remove 26 from the name? >> > > I still believe seperating out kernels for different systems is wrong, > and have yet to see any evidence to support the contrary. It > contradicts the goals of the kernel itself. > > In addition, it just increases load on maintainers. > > For anyone else who tries to suggest these silly names, state what you > would actually put in them to differentiate them. > > James > > _______________________________________________ > arch mailing list > arch@archlinux.org > http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch > > > _______________________________________________ arch mailing list arch@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
Server mod seems inntresting. Arch still have no kernel with xen/openvz build in.
_______________________________________________ arch mailing list arch@archlinux.org http://archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
