On Thu, Oct 18, 2012 at 10:33:27AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > All of this can probably already be done with a new 'flavor' in the > > existing kernel.spec. I really wouldn't do the common/minimal split > > though. It just makes it more complicated for not a whole lot of gain. > > > > The idea that Dave, Justin, and Kevin all had simlutaneously about > > doing a 'kernel-virtguest' might be worthwhile if someone wants to > > spend time poking at a config, etc. > > That also works with the normal paradigm where all the variants provide > 'kernel' for RPM dependency purposes; if you try to have a kernel-minimal that > provides 'kernel' while also having a 'kernel' package that requires > 'kernel-minimal', things get a bit more strange. 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?). -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
