On Thu, Apr 26, 2001 at 04:20:46PM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 02:18:30AM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote: > > I could disagree pretty heavily by pointing that this would be shit as > > it would add an hour to the install. Why not just provide a stock i386 > > kernel and let people compile it later on? Some people need to patch > > in mm/swap patches, netfilter patches, their own hacks, etc, etc. > > please pay attention.
I have been, oddly enough. > nobody (at least as far as i can tell) has suggested getting rid of the > stock kernel-image package, so there will be no effect at all on people > who just want to install the system and run it. AFAIK, you suggested adding a "compile your own kernel" step at install time. Which would be bad. AFAIK. Bear in mind "02:18:30AM +1000". > 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 know, this is shit. Pay attention to my other postings on the other part of this thread and you'll see. -- Daniel Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED]