"Jeff V. Merkey" <jmerkey@vger.timpanogas.org> said:
[...]
> Your way out in the weeds. What started this thread was a customer who
> ended up loading the wrong arch on a system and hanging. I have to
> post a kernel RPM for our release, and it's onerous to make customers
> recompile kernels all the time and be guinea pigs for arch ports.
I'd prefer to be a guinea pig for one of 3 or 4 generic kernels distributed
in binary than of one of the hundreds of possibilities of patching a kernel
together at boot, plus the (presumamby rather complex and fragile)
machinery to do so *before* the kernel is booted, thank you very much.
Plus I'm getting pissed off by how long a boot takes as it stands today...
> They just want it to boot, and run with the same level of ease of use
> and stability they get with NT and NetWare and other stuff they are used
> to. This is an easy choice from where I'm sitting.
Easy: i386. Or i486 (I very much doubt your customers run on less, and this
should be geneic enough).
-- Dr. Horst H. von Brand mailto:vonbrand@inf.utfsm.cl Departamento de Informatica Fono: +56 32 654431 Universidad Tecnica Federico Santa Maria +56 32 654239 Casilla 110-V, Valparaiso, Chile Fax: +56 32 797513 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Nov 15 2000 - 21:00:11 EST