| 1 |
On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 02:10:54PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 12:58 PM Consus <consus@××××.net> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > |
| 4 |
> > even distribution kernel is not an |
| 5 |
> > official thing, but a desperate attempt of someone to fix things. |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Huh? gentoo-sources is in at least as good a shape as I've ever seen |
| 9 |
> it. I'd argue it is in better shape than at a lot of times in the |
| 10 |
> past. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Still you have to manually configure things. And I know that Gentoo is |
| 13 |
about choice, but configuring kernel is hard. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
> There are other kernels in the repo, as there have been for as long as |
| 16 |
> I can remember. They vary in purpose and level of QA. And of course |
| 17 |
> you can just download your own sources considering the official |
| 18 |
> handbook instructions has you build your own kernel anyway... I |
| 19 |
> personally just run upstream longterm so that I have more control over |
| 20 |
> things, because I run ZFS. However I wouldn't say that this is any |
| 21 |
> problem with the Gentoo kernels - I just have unusual needs and a |
| 22 |
> package for the source tarball doesn't really add much value anyway. |
| 23 |
> A package that actually builds/installs a working kernel seems like a |
| 24 |
> lot more value-add aside from the QA. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
That's why I love gentoo-kernel-bin. It provides a decent kernel without |
| 27 |
any "oh crap oh crap oh crap what should I do with all these new |
| 28 |
options". |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
P.S. genkernel seems to be actively maintained again, neat. |
Archives