Re: kernel-headers rpm ?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Riku,

Not that my vote counts, but I support your suggestion.

Richard

-- 
Richard Troy, Chief Scientist
Science Tools Corporation
rtroy@ScienceTools.com, 510-567-9957, http://ScienceTools.com/

On Fri, 17 Jan 2003, Riku Meskanen wrote:

> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2003 17:17:17 +0200 (EET)
> From: Riku Meskanen <mesrik@cc.jyu.fi>
> Reply-To: redhat-devel-list@redhat.com
> To: redhat-devel-list@redhat.com
> Subject: Re: kernel-headers rpm ?

...snip...

>
> So how about having this very small 8.5MB portion installed
> also with binary kernel to /lib/modules/$version/include ?
>
> That would be very tiny tradeoff from root-fs vs. large
> lump of more free space at /usr. Building modules for all
> installed kernel versions would be a breeze too.
>
> Kernel headers would ofcourse shipped as usual with the kernel-
> source too (minor reduncancy), but having full kernel source
> installed is plain silly when you need just few header files to
> compile modules and get going with thirdparty software like vmware.
>
> It makes sense to me having kernel source installed for those
> taking part of developing drivers etc., but not necessarily on
> every system in use and where there is need to compile modules.
>
> Those familiar with Linux and Unices know dirty tricks to get
> around /usr lack of space with symlinks or extract rpm2cpio,
> but it can get much too complicated just to have modules built
> and installed for all installed binary kernels at once.
>
> :-) riku
>
>



_______________________________________________
Redhat-devel-list mailing list
Redhat-devel-list@redhat.com
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list

[Index of Archives]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Red Hat General]     [Fedora]     [Red Hat Install]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux