On Wed, 2013-10-30 at 10:16 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > [ Resend with the right server mailing list address. Sorry kernel@ people.] > > Hi All, > > I realize the WG is just forming up and you have a lot of other items > to cover for now, but I wanted to get this sent out and have people > start thinking about it sooner rather than later. > > The kernel team is interested in what the Server WG sees as its > requirements for the kernel package. Does today's kernel image mostly > suit those needs already, or are there changes that would be > beneficial? > > While you think about this, please keep in mind that the kernel team > really wants to keep a single kernel package across all 3 products as > much as possible. We won't scale to providing multiple kernel > packages or vmlinux binaries for each product. At the moment, we're > essentially looking for a good "core" kernel package that suits cloud, > server, and workstation and then at repackaging the drivers into > subpackages where appropriate. > > If you have changes you'd like to see, please let us know what they > are and the reasoning behind those changes. Hopefully we can work > with all 3 WGs and come up with something suitable for everyone. > Thanks for your time. Personally I think that as long as the kernel is modular and all useful modules are available, the Server WG should not have trouble with it. I guess the installation procedure (hence Anaconda) need to be somewhat customizable so that the server image is by default a lot friendlier to the type of hardware a server gets to use, and the kind of defaults that make more sense for a server vs say desktop or cloud. But I think all this can be built easily above a common kernel. Simo. -- Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York _______________________________________________ kernel mailing list kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel
