| 1 |
Albert Hopkins wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, 2010-06-18 at 14:26 +1000, Jake Moe wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> No, I was tempted to try genkernel, but again, OCD got the best of me; |
| 5 |
>> I |
| 6 |
>> like Gentoo because I tell it what I want and need, and it does that |
| 7 |
>> and |
| 8 |
>> nothing else. Genkernel, in my understand, does everything (and |
| 9 |
>> apparently does it pretty well), but it means that it's bigger than it |
| 10 |
>> needs to be. Plus, I hadn't gotten a reply back in a while, and I'm |
| 11 |
>> limited on time with this laptop, so I went back to that which I know |
| 12 |
>> better. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> And I thought the Live CD used genkernel; I thought that was where |
| 15 |
>> genkernel came from in the first place? Is it different? |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
> I have no idea; I don't use genkernel. |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> All I'm saying is if you can try booting on a kernel you know at least |
| 20 |
> *should* work (such as the live cd or genkernel) and that works then at |
| 21 |
> least you can deduce it down to kernel config. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> -a |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
This is funny. I have NEVER got a genkernel to work on my system. |
| 28 |
Actually, on any system. I'm not sure the OP would know that kernel is |
| 29 |
any better then the one he makes. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Dale |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
:-) :-) |
Archives