There probably wouldn't quite be room to include the kitchen sink. :-> IMHO, a better alternative to the large, best-endeavours kernel would be to ship a really tight kernel and use the installation front-end to configure additional support (in modules where possible or desirable).
Casper Boden-Cummins. >---------- >From: David J. Evans[SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: 16 August 1996 14:12 >To: 'debian-user@lists.debian.org' >Cc: The recipient's address is unknown. >Subject: Re: kernel size (was: How do I get GATEWAY2000 PS/2 mouse to >work?) > > >On Thu, 15 Aug 1996 10:04:04 +0100 Casper BodenCummins ><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >[snipped stuff about PS/2 support not being present by >default ....] > >> The real question is whether the default kernel should be bloated with >> features, or pared down. > >As a brand new Debian user who didn't even know how to >spell Colonel until recently, and who has been caught out >by the lack of PS/2 support, I'd vote for a large >"everything and the kitchen sink" kernel to cover most >eventualities. This will give heart to new-users and >upgraders, and can trimmed and tweaked by the gurus. > >And thank you to all who responded with my "newbie" >question about telnetting in as root to a box without a >screen or keyboard - su and /etc/securetty were all new to >me. > >David > >______________ >David J. Evans >AMS, Virology Research Group, The University of Reading >Whiteknights, P.O. Box 228, Reading RG6 6AJ >Tel : +44 (0)118 9318893 Fax : +44 (0)118 9316537 >http://skpc10.reading.ac.uk/ > > >
