Gentoo Archives: gentoo-releng

From: Michiel de Bruijne <m.debruijne@×××××××.nl>
To: gentoo-releng@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 16:03:16
Message-Id: 200610221802.59072.m.debruijne@matrict.nl
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel by Chris Gianelloni
On Sunday 22 October 2006 16:24, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> I've started maintaining the genkernel kernel configs pretty much > exclusively. I see no problem with iptables support being added. The > best would be if you attached a patch against the current configs, as it > would be easier on me, as I actually have to apply them to two places > (genkernel SVN, and releng kconfigs for 2007.0) for the next release. > The main change is that (for at least x86/amd64) we're trying to make > the default kernel, which is also used on the LiveCD, as generic as > possible and as feature filled as possible.
That's good to read. Currently there are two kernel configs used for (2.4 and 2.6). Features/modules are added and removed with every kernel release. Or entire sections are moved to different parts in the kernel dependency hierarchy (e.g. netfilter/iptables). There is also the problem that some modules wont build in a specific kernel version but build/run fine in another version of the kernel. I think if we want genkernel/livecd as feature filled as possible we should extend the default configs to a x.y.z scheme. A new kernel version is released about four times a year so this shouldn't be to hard to maintain. I'm willing to do the work (creating patches and maintaining future kernel configs), but do you agree and are willing to apply it? The next thing on my annoyance list is I need to put too many items in modules.autoload.d that should be handled in init-scripts (e.g. acpid and cpufreqd), but I deal with those later. -- gentoo-releng@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-releng] firewall support in genkernel Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>