Re: [Rule-list] Kernel subproject

[Chris Kloiber]

On Sat, 2002-02-09 at 16:35, Marco Fioretti wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I think we should start to think also to which kernel we want to
> install. My understanding is that the 2.4 series, at least with its
> default settings, is by itself not friendly with low (cpu/ram)
> machines.
> 
> What is your opinion? should we provide the choice between:
> 
> 1) standard RH kernel (for those who do have RAM, and just want the
> lightest possible install for whatever reason)
> 
> 2) A kernel optimized for low (cpu/ram). How would it be? Which
> settings or feature we could or should remove or tune to make it so?
> Could it be a 2.4 (journaling, iptables and what else?) or should it
> be 2.2? (always maintaining compatibility with other RH packages one
> might want to add?)
> 
>               Ciao,
>                       Marco Fioretti

Unless you want to burn cycles backporting many needed things (I'm
thinking iptables for starters) stick to an Official Red Hat kernel.

I was thinking that the easiest thing to do would be to have an
installer that only partitions, formats and mounts the hard drive, then
copies a very small (basically an i386 kernel, glibc, rpm, rhn_register,
up2date, a shell and any other required things) installed image to the
drive. Then the user can boot into that, register with Red Hat Network
and install anything he/she wants with up2date, which can handle
dependencies as needed.

-- 
Chris Kloiber, RHCE
Enterprise Support
Red Hat, Inc.