| 1 |
On Sat, Jan 26, 2013 at 5:30 PM, Fabio Erculiani <lxnay@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> What I always wondered is why we have ebuilds for every kind of binary |
| 3 |
> except for kernels, yet we build official kernels with official |
| 4 |
> configs for our livecds. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Yup. I don't think the solution is to have a USE flag for every |
| 7 |
kernel parameter, but having a standardized kernel with a few flags |
| 8 |
probably isn't a bad idea. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
However, since I'm sure we want to fully support user-built kernels I |
| 11 |
don't really see that solving the config check problem. You can't |
| 12 |
just depend on the standardized kernel, unless you use a virtual and |
| 13 |
make gentoo-sources something that fulfills it (which means users |
| 14 |
going that route just don't get the check). That still isn't a bad |
| 15 |
solution - those who want the hand-holding version can just use the |
| 16 |
canned kernel. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
I would still suggest that if we went that route the kernel needs more |
| 19 |
modules than present on our install CDs. Nothing wrong with the |
| 20 |
install CDs per-se - they're focused on doing installation, not |
| 21 |
interfacing with webcams, IR remotes, or radios. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Rich |
Archives