On Fri, 2004-10-15 at 16:18, Ken Johanson wrote: > > I really and truly don't see the fuss. > > I dont either - I say its trivial to just include it on the installer > discs. Its the most sound way to do it - no versioning, no networking or > downloading or md5summing or biting our nails. It just works. So > beautifully. > > Why isn't having the kernel source in > > a _source_ RPM better? It's more handy to have your modified kernel in the > > form of an RPM anyway, _especially_ if you're a power user. > > > > Also, I don't think you're likely to want to get the ISO images anyway -- > > you probably will want the latest update package if available, since kernel > > update packages are both inevitable and not released lightly. > > > > > This I fully agree on, that updates are usually needed anyway, except > that we should be able to do incremental upgrades to the original source > tree, not have to grab entire source trees or prebuilt, one-size-fits > all binaries, at the moment we realize "hey - this distro didnt come > with the src tree - let me donload it or burn it onto disc" So how many other mailing lists have you lost this flame war on? (sorry for feeding the troll! Really!) -- Scot L. Harris webid@xxxxxxxxxx Regardless of whether a mission expands or contracts, administrative overhead continues to grow at a steady rate.
