1 |
On Sunday 22 October 2006 16:24, Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
2 |
> I've started maintaining the genkernel kernel configs pretty much |
3 |
> exclusively. I see no problem with iptables support being added. The |
4 |
> best would be if you attached a patch against the current configs, as it |
5 |
> would be easier on me, as I actually have to apply them to two places |
6 |
> (genkernel SVN, and releng kconfigs for 2007.0) for the next release. |
7 |
> The main change is that (for at least x86/amd64) we're trying to make |
8 |
> the default kernel, which is also used on the LiveCD, as generic as |
9 |
> possible and as feature filled as possible. |
10 |
|
11 |
That's good to read. |
12 |
|
13 |
Currently there are two kernel configs used for (2.4 and 2.6). |
14 |
Features/modules are added and removed with every kernel release. Or entire |
15 |
sections are moved to different parts in the kernel dependency hierarchy |
16 |
(e.g. netfilter/iptables). There is also the problem that some modules wont |
17 |
build in a specific kernel version but build/run fine in another version of |
18 |
the kernel. |
19 |
|
20 |
I think if we want genkernel/livecd as feature filled as possible we should |
21 |
extend the default configs to a x.y.z scheme. A new kernel version is |
22 |
released about four times a year so this shouldn't be to hard to maintain. |
23 |
I'm willing to do the work (creating patches and maintaining future kernel |
24 |
configs), but do you agree and are willing to apply it? |
25 |
|
26 |
The next thing on my annoyance list is I need to put too many items in |
27 |
modules.autoload.d that should be handled in init-scripts (e.g. acpid and |
28 |
cpufreqd), but I deal with those later. |
29 |
-- |
30 |
gentoo-releng@g.o mailing list |