[lkml]   [2000]   [Nov]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Installing kernel 2.4
On Wed, 08 Nov 2000, Horst von Brand wrote:
> "Jeff V. Merkey" <> said:
> [...]
> > Your way out in the weeds. What started this thread was a customer who
> > ended up loading the wrong arch on a system and hanging. I have to
> > post a kernel RPM for our release, and it's onerous to make customers
> > recompile kernels all the time and be guinea pigs for arch ports.
> I'd prefer to be a guinea pig for one of 3 or 4 generic kernels distributed
> in binary than of one of the hundreds of possibilities of patching a kernel
> together at boot, plus the (presumamby rather complex and fragile)
> machinery to do so *before* the kernel is booted, thank you very much.

Hmm... some mechanism for selecting the appropriate *module* might be nice,
after boot...

> Plus I'm getting pissed off by how long a boot takes as it stands today...

Yep: slowing down boottimes is not an attractive idea.

> > They just want it to boot, and run with the same level of ease of use
> > and stability they get with NT and NetWare and other stuff they are used
> > to. This is an easy choice from where I'm sitting.
> Easy: i386. Or i486 (I very much doubt your customers run on less, and this
> should be geneic enough).

I think there are better options. Jeff could, for example, *optimise* for
Pentium II/III, without using PII specific instructions, in the main kernel,
then have multiple target binaries for modules.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:45    [W:0.058 / U:1.520 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site