On Sun, 28 Nov 2004, Dave Jones wrote: > On Mon, Nov 29, 2004 at 03:17:49AM +0100, Dag Wieers wrote: > > > > One good reason to do it is that you can be sure the config matches > > > > exactly what is currently running. > > > ls /boot/config-`uname -r` > > > > It does not give the same guarantees as /proc/config.gz though, it may not > > even exist. > > The only way it wouldn't exist that's been demonstrated so far has been > through someone cluelessly installing a kernel by non-standard means. > (rpmbuild does the right thing, make install does the right thing, leaving > just a series of cp's/mv's by hand as the only possible way to screw up). Fair enough, I wasn't aware this has become the standard enforced practice. > There's still no guarantee that /proc/config.gz exists either (supposing I > enabled /proc/config.gz in the Fedora kernel). There's still the possibility > that someone is running a self-compiled kernel with it disabled. True, but if Red Hat would enable it, it will be influencing other users to enable it too. BTW is it enabled by default in a vanilla kernel ? > This thread has got about as interesting as the 'where is the > kernel-source for fc3' threads. Can we stop kicking this dead horse now? This is my last then :) I'm sure people hoped it was still alive or at least stuburnly playing dead, but if you say it's dead... -- dag wieers, dag@xxxxxxxxxx, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
