On Tue, 2004-02-24 at 12:12, Colin Watson wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2004 at 11:31:26AM -0500, Ed Cogburn wrote: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >3) Perhaps there is an easier/better way to do this > > > > Well, not necessarily "better", but the simpler thing to do is just > > not use apt and Debian's packages for kernel management. Instead, > > manage that yourself, especially if you recompile your own kernel > > anyway. I'll be flamed for going against the "Debian Way", but I have > > yet to see a meaningful advantage to handling the kernel in the > > "Debian Way", > > I've always thought the whole "Debian Way" business was faintly > ridiculous anyway. If it works for you, use it, but we've always > supported people rolling their own, even when it'd be convenient to do > otherwise (e.g. no dependencies from normal binaries on kernel-image > packages). > > "Debian Way" always sounded a bit too religious for me. :-) If there's > such a thing at all, then it's probably choice. >
The "Debian Way", as I think i've heard it refered to, is merely the way its done using Debian's particular tools (i.e. make-kpkg rather than the all manual kernel compile, using .debs rather than installing from source, etc). I can't say that I've ever noticed anyone chastised for not using them, though I've often heard it said that solutions using debian's tools are easier, cleaner, or just prefered. -davidc -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
