On Thu, 2009-09-03 at 11:05 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On 09/03/2009 10:57 AM, Hans de Goede wrote: > > It really is like having to support gentoo, versus having to support a > > distro using pre build packages. And I would really like to move to the having to > > support a pre-build package model for the initrd. ...but not for drivers ;) It's funny how sometimes building binaries makes life easier for users, but other times it's horribly wrong :) > The problem is this: > > The kernel binary RPM contains this pre-built initrd. The kernel source > RPM does not contain the sources necessary to make this pre-built initrd. > > This makes me rather uncomfortable from a Licensing perspective. I'm > also concerned about it from a security perspective, as these binaries > are very likely to be overlooked when security updates are pushed. The problem I have is that some folks want to include additional drivers into their initrd. What are we going to recommend for this case? I know one can still build a kernel-specific version, but I fear that this results in many users having no benefit of the generic image because it'll not contain the additional bits they needed to add. Can't we at least ensure all deps are available on the system by default, so that users *can* rebuild? Jon. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
