On Saturday 05 October 2002 15:49, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Zoilo, > > If I included the pxe stuff with the normal kernel package, > it would make the package almost twice as big.
The ltsp_kernel package today is 5.5 MB, the pxestuff package is 1.4 MB, so the sum would be rougly 7 MB. True, the kernel would be duplicated, but IMHO in my opinion the price/convenience ratio would be OK! > I think the pxe stuff should really be a whole kernel package > by itself, but I just haven't had the time to put it together. In that case, you would need 3 packages really: => ltsp_kernel as is, but minus kernel => ltsp kernel (non-PXE) => ltsp_kernel (PXE) If you make only 2 packages, ie. a full non-PXE and a full PXE version, you get a collision if you need to install both (like in my case), since there is a lot of overlapping stuff. Another reason why I would think it is best to compile an all-in-one package. Then again, we could also create a add-on rpm-package from the existing pxestuff package (easy and quick). Just let me know if you think this makes sense and you would like me to do that. > > Jim. > > On Sat, 5 Oct 2002, Zoilo wrote: > > Jim, > > > > I was just wondering why pxestuff.tgz is not simply provided as a part of > > the ltsp_kernel RPM package. > > > > It seems to me that PXE has become so prevalent, that the PXE kernel > > version might as well be just included with the ltsp_kernel RPM. -- Z. ------------------------------------------------------------ "If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail." ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _____________________________________________________________________ Ltsp-discuss mailing list. To un-subscribe, or change prefs, goto: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltsp-discuss For additional LTSP help, try #ltsp channel on irc.openprojects.net
