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

Re: Kernel 2.6.30



stan wrote:
> Second this.  That would be great.  I dropped the size by 90% for a
> time by eliminating unneeded functionality, then some change came along
> that made my config file unstable, and I couldn't get back.  This seems
> to be a problem generally, that there is a lot of dependency between
> options that isn't clear.  A tool to create a "custom" kernel would be
> excellent.  I suspect it would be a lot of work to create and maintain
> though, especially at the rate the kernel changes.

Unless you have some really valid reason (e.g. you need some kernel patch
which can't be built as an out-of-tree module), building custom kernels is
just a waste of time.

        Kevin Kofler


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