|| ||Matthew Miller <mattdm-AT-fedoraproject.org> |
|| ||Development discussions related to Fedora <devel-AT-lists.fedoraproject.org> |
|| ||Re: modules, firmware, kernel size (was Re: systemd requires HTTP
server and serves QR codes) |
|| ||Thu, 18 Oct 2012 11:15:00 -0400|
|| ||Article, Thread
On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:44:58AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > I'm open to this idea, but I think it's nicer if one can go from the reduced
> > selection to the full just by adding in the right package, not changing or
> > removing things. Unlike PAE or etc., I don't think we'd actually build
> > anything differently (would we?).
> Of course we would. The entire point is to reduce the size, and the
> only way to reduce the size is to build it with different config
> options. And we're not talking about going from kernel-virtguest to
> kernel by installing kernel-everythingnotinvirtguest. That's still
> going down the "split the kernel up into a bunch of subpackages" route
> which just creates more work for the maintainers.
We already have kernel-modules-extra. I think the idea would be to add
kernel-modules-virt and kernel-modules-normal to that, at most. (Or, put the
virt modules in kernel, and just add one more subpackage,
kernel-modules-normal.) There's already code in the spec file for dealing
with modules-extra, so it's mostly a matter of extending that slightly --
not doing something entirely new, *and* not going down the alarmist slope of
a horde of subpackages.
> At the moment though, all of this is just talk anyway. If something
> like this is to happen, someone actually has to do work.
Start with an idea, discuss it, come up with a plan, find resources for that
plan, and then implement. Sometimes things happen the other way around, but
only when we happen to be lucky, and it often has consequences like extra
ongoing work with no support. So, just talk is an important place to start.
Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <firstname.lastname@example.org>
devel mailing list
to post comments)