On Wed, 2003-10-15 at 07:27, Guillaume Rousse wrote: > Ainsi parlait [EMAIL PROTECTED] : > > I cannot say i am very happy with this descission. Or was it a mistake? I > > surely hope so. Explaining people they have to install correct > > kernelsource to avoid problems when using/installing nvidia, win4lin, > > vmware and a dozen other things is difficult enough, not putting them on > > the download edition is not going to make it better. If it was a space > > consideration, why do we have 2 apache-source (what is it for?) and 3 (!) > > versions of the kernel docs there (and probably lots of other redundant > > stuff).
This is surely not a move. I once reported it for 9.0 or 9.1, I don't remember. Then Warly said he was using his own scripts to select the iso rpms, so I didn't bother crying again about the same problem. It's just an oversight I assume. Now, if the power pack has the NVidia drivers, this will surely provide for 90% of the users need. > Which remember me that if we were able to split headers from real sources, you > won't need to install 30Mo package to build those additional kernel modules. > Hmmm. I think I saw today that kernel-source requires 120MB to be installed. That would indeed be nice to find a solution. Split the different module categories (sound, network, etc.)? > Maybe there are technical arguments i didn't caught however, as it seems we > already had this discussion. -- _ _ _ _ | |_____| | |_/ | | / / -_) | / / | |_\_\___|_|_\_\_| @ sbcglobal.net
