On Thursday 14 June 2001 08:14, David Luyer wrote:
> Well, I'm actually looking at the 2nd idea I mentioned in my e-mail -- a
> very small "kernel package" which has a config script, a list of config
> options and the files they depend on and an appropriately tagged CVS tree
> which can then be u
Daniel Phillips writes:
> On Thursday 14 June 2001 10:34, Alexander Viro wrote:
> > On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > > This sounds a lot like apt-get, doesn't it?
> >
> > Folks, RTFFAQ, please. URL is attached to the end of each posting.
>
> The FAQ blesses the idea of people setti
On Thursday 14 June 2001 10:34, Alexander Viro wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2001, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> > This sounds a lot like apt-get, doesn't it?
>
> Folks, RTFFAQ, please. URL is attached to the end of each posting.
The FAQ blesses the idea of people setting up incremental download services,
(I wrote)
> > This might actually make sense - a kernel composed of multiple versioned
> > segments. A tool which works out dependencies of the options being selected,
> > downloads the required parts if the latest versions of those parts are not
> > already downloaded, and then builds the ker
David Luyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
[...]
> This might actually make sense - a kernel composed of multiple versioned
> segments. A tool which works out dependencies of the options being selected,
> downloads the required parts if the latest versions of those parts are not
> already downloaded
On Thursday 14 June 2001 04:00, David Luyer wrote:
> > Would it make sense to create some sort of 'make config' script that
> > determines what you want in your kernel and then downloads only those
> > components? After all, with the constant release of new hardware, isn't a
> > 50MB kernel releas
>
> Or as a simpler design, something like;
>
> * a copy of the kernel maintained in a CVS tree
> * kernel download would pull down:
> * the build script
> * a file containing the list of filenames depended on by
> each config option
> * build script builds the conf
> I agree that removing support for any hardware is a bad idea but I question
> the idea of putting it all in one monolithic download (tar file). If we're
> considering the concern for less developed nations with older hardware,
> imagine how you would like to download the whole kernel with an o
8 matches
Mail list logo
