On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 8:41 AM, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 08:19:38AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >> So we're already smaller than Ubuntu. Size is one of the things we've >> been told is key to adoption in the cloud. If we're already smaller, >> and Ubuntu is more widely adopted, I don't see that holding true. >> What am I missing, or is the "we need a smaller kernel package" thing >> somehow trying to pull the wool over my eyes? > > Oh, it absolutely remains nice to have, and by "nice" I mean "awesome". > > If we can improve all four of the big size consumers (python, kernel, > modularized docs, modularized i18n), it'll go from "on par" to actually > being an advantage. And even if we can't get to that for a while, > improvement is still improvement, and when I said size isn't the primary > driver, I certainly didn't mean to imply that it's not an important one. > > Since isn't the only driver for the kernel work you're doing either, I don't > think. Another big advantage is that the modularized drivers will allow us > to skip out-of-schedule updates for security updates in the driver package. Erm.. only if you manually pay attention to where the driver is for a particular CVE. It's a subpackage, not a separate package. As far as I know, the yum security metadata thing applies to packages as an entire set, not each subpackage. I believe that means when we build a kernel for a CVE fix, you're still going to see a kernel-core update available being marked as a security fix. josh _______________________________________________ cloud mailing list cloud@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/cloud Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
