Subject: Re: 2.0 upgrade
To: Daniel Ouellet <email@example.com>
From: Andy Ruhl <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 03/09/2005 11:58:00
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 13:52:15 -0500, Daniel Ouellet <email@example.com> wrote:
> > I've yet to try the new restore CD (I've been running 2.0 for a while
> > now), but I agree, Alex should be applauded. Thanks!
> Yes he does. I wanted to do it for the longest time, but that doesn't count!
> Time is missing and wanted to do thing is just talks, doing is better! (:>
> > As for the kernel, the point I was trying to get at is that since we
> > have a bootloader on the linux partition, there's no need to be too
> > worried about kernel size as far as GENERIC. It might be nice to
> > mention that if one chooses to load the kernel directly via the
> > firmware (ie the real kernel named vmlinux.gz rather than the
> > bootloader named vmlinux.gz), then this won't work. And it would be
> > nice to submit a known working kernel config to the source tree for
> > this reason.
> > But otherwise, GENERIC supports a great range of hardware in other
> > archs, why not this one? The Qube has a PCI slot, might as well take
> > advantage right? It's rather easier to trim the kernel down later
> > after the hardware setup is solidified than trying to add it in not
> > knowing exactly what to use, this is what adjustkernel is for.
> Still the box is not super powerful. Not that it would make a big difference
> anyway, but I guess it's always the choice of who make the kernel to start
> with. I think Alex did a great job. I know if I would have done it, I would
> have been even more restrictive has he did. I am more of the school, that
> less is better. Don't run anything you don't need. Plus I do run GENERIC of
> OpenBSD without never changing the kernel, but that's a different story all
> together. On the Cobalt, I think supporting the box hardware as purchase is
> the way to go and anything else should be add on. But hey, we are free to
> see it differently for sure! (:>
> In the end, who ever do the work have the luxury to select what he wants to
> put in it...
I agree, I cut down my kernel to only have what is needed. But I do
like to start from a bigger one so I don't miss something.
But what you are saying is a good point, and it probably makes sense
to make a few kernel config files that have only the hardware that
comes with the Qube, Raq, different models, etc.
I'd also like to see USB added (even if it's commented out) and also
lots of other stuff that shows up in i386 which isn't in other stuff
(again, even if it's commented out). This makes it easier to work
with. I did add USB support eariler and added in all the files that
were needed. I think one needs to submit a pr as an official way to
ask for this stuff to be included.
I'm going to not be able to work on this for a while, but when I can I
will try to see what a good "standard" qube2 kernel config file would