Re: Why no /proc/config.gz on FC-3 kernel?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Sun, 28 Nov 2004, Dave Jones wrote:

> On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 01:07:58AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> 
>  > >  ls /boot/config-`uname -r`
>  > 
>  > I guess the argument is: there's a chance that something got skipped and the
>  > a kernel got built with the name matching a /boot/config-* file but actually
>  > with different options -- no risk of that with the /proc approach.
>  
> There's no risk of it happening with the current approach either.
> The .config that gets packaged is the .config rpmbuild faced
> when it built the RPM. Why would it be different ?

Well, I can imagine the situation that Fedora has already upgraded your 
kernel (read: replaced) and some clever mechanisme needs the kernel config 
to dynamically build a module for your current kernel. (DKMS?)

Or when you have made your own kernel, and the config is not installed in 
/boot. Of course a tool can check that, can check the rpmdb and a lot of 
other things, but it would not have the same simplicity as a 
/proc/config.gz that is guaranteed to be there. (A lot of people rebuild 
kernels from the original Red Hat config file BTW)

Again, I'm not in favor of one or another, but I can see some potential 
for having it around. One can disagree with that, but can't ignore that it 
gives more guarantees or potential.

--   dag wieers,  dag@xxxxxxxxxx,  http://dag.wieers.com/   --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]


[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux