[PATCH 0/2] linux-image-extra support
Locked
[PATCH 0/2] linux-image-extra support
 
|
During UDS we discussed the current slim version of the -virtual kernel
and how for some uses we desire a very slim kernel and for others we desire a near complete install. We also noted that we have a constant drip, drip, drop of new requests for packages to be added back into the -virtual kernel. These are both time consuming, risky, and costly to SRU. The suggested solution at UDS was to drop all of the remaining modules excluded from the current linux-image-virtual into a new package which could then be installed when missing packages were needed. Following this email are two patches. The first refactors the module-inclusion logic so that it may be applied repeatedly and that any left overs are retained. The second uses these new features to then package up the remainder as linux-image-extras-virtual. This will both ameliorate the issues described above and would also provide a solution for another work item related to improving the include exclude list which was slated to simplify adding packages requested via the drips. In my testing the only difference between the previous linux-image-virtual and the new is that the empty directories are elided. I do not expect this to be an issue but would be easy to correct if needed. Proposing for Oneiric. -apw Andy Whitcroft (2): UBUNTU: make module-inclusion selection retain the left overs UBUNTU: add a new linux-image-extras package for virtual debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub | 21 ++++++++++++++ debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk | 1 + debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk | 22 ++++++++++++++- debian/scripts/module-inclusion | 37 ++++++++++++++++---------- 4 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) -- 1.7.4.1 -- kernel-team mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team |
[PATCH 1/2] UBUNTU: make module-inclusion selection retain the left overs
|
|
Move module inclusion to a model when the non-included modules
are retained. This allow two things: 1) processing can now be applied iterativly to carve out any number of sub-packages, and 2) we can package the 'remaining' modules. Signed-off-by: Andy Whitcroft <[hidden email]> --- debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk | 8 +++++++- debian/scripts/module-inclusion | 37 +++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) diff --git a/debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk b/debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk index d0f31f3..c0259e6 100644 --- a/debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk +++ b/debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk @@ -82,11 +82,17 @@ endif # Remove all modules not in the inclusion list. # if [ -f $(DEBIAN)/control.d/$(target_flavour).inclusion-list ] ; then \ - $(SHELL) $(DROOT)/scripts/module-inclusion $(pkgdir)/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel \ + mkdir -p $(pkgdir)-ALL/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*; \ + mv $(pkgdir)/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel \ + $(pkgdir)-ALL/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel; \ + $(SHELL) $(DROOT)/scripts/module-inclusion --master \ + $(pkgdir)-ALL/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel \ + $(pkgdir)/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel \ $(DEBIAN)/control.d/$(target_flavour).inclusion-list 2>&1 | \ tee $(target_flavour).inclusion-list.log; \ /sbin/depmod -b $(pkgdir) -ea -F $(pkgdir)/boot/System.map-$(abi_release)-$* \ $(abi_release)-$* 2>&1 |tee $(target_flavour).depmod.log; \ + rm -rf $(pkgdir)-ALL; \ fi ifeq ($(no_dumpfile),) diff --git a/debian/scripts/module-inclusion b/debian/scripts/module-inclusion index ec3ce5e..deb07a8 100755 --- a/debian/scripts/module-inclusion +++ b/debian/scripts/module-inclusion @@ -5,17 +5,33 @@ # The includsion list format must be a bash regular expression. # # usage: $0 ROOT INCLUSION_LIST -# example: $0 debian/build/build-virtual debian.master/control.d/virtual.inclusion-list -ROOT=$1 -ILIST=$2 +# example: $0 debian/build/build-virtual \ +# debian/build/build-virtual-ALL debian/build/build-virtual \ +# debian.master/control.d/virtual.inclusion-list +master=0 +if [ "$1" = "--master" ]; then + master=1 + shift +fi -NROOT=${ROOT}.new +ROOT=$1 +NROOT=$2 +ILIST=$3 # # Prep a destination directory. # mkdir -p ${NROOT} -rsync -a --exclude="*.ko" ${ROOT}/ ${NROOT} + +# Copy over the framework... +if [ "$master" -eq 1 ]; then + (cd ${ROOT}; find . ! -name "*.ko" -type f) | \ + while read f + do + mkdir -p ${NROOT}/`dirname $f` + mv ${ROOT}/$f ${NROOT}/$f + done +fi cat ${ILIST} |while read i do @@ -27,13 +43,13 @@ do (cd ${ROOT}; eval find "${i}" -name "*.ko") |while read f do mkdir -p ${NROOT}/`dirname $f` - cp ${ROOT}/$f ${NROOT}/$f + mv ${ROOT}/$f ${NROOT}/$f done else if [ -f "${ROOT}/$i" ] then mkdir -p ${NROOT}/`dirname $i` - cp ${ROOT}/$i ${NROOT}/$i + mv ${ROOT}/$i ${NROOT}/$i else echo Warning: Could not find ${ROOT}/$i fi @@ -41,11 +57,4 @@ do done -# -# Cleanup -# -rm -rf ${ROOT} -mv ${NROOT} ${ROOT} - exit 0 - -- 1.7.4.1 -- kernel-team mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team |
[PATCH 2/2] UBUNTU: add a new linux-image-extras package for virtual
|
|
In reply to this post by Andy Whitcroft-3
Add a new linux-image-extras package for the virtual flavours.
This package contains all of the left over kernel modules which are not in the main linux-image package. This allows users to opt-in to a full server style install in a virtual machine, preventing slow bloat of the core linux-image install. Signed-off-by: Andy Whitcroft <[hidden email]> --- debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk | 1 + debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk | 22 ++++++++++++++++++---- 3 files changed, 40 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub b/debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub index e941063..f304d96 100644 --- a/debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub +++ b/debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub @@ -47,6 +47,27 @@ Description: Linux kernel image for version PKGVER on DESC the linux-FLAVOUR meta-package, which will ensure that upgrades work correctly, and that supporting packages are also installed. +Package: linux-image-extra-PKGVER-ABINUM-FLAVOUR +Architecture: ARCH +Section: admin +Priority: optional +Depends: ${misc:Depends}, ${shlibs:Depends}, linux-image-PKGVER-ABINUM-FLAVOUR (= PKGVER) +Description: Linux kernel image for version PKGVER on DESC + This package contains the Linux kernel image for version PKGVER on + DESC. + . + Also includes the corresponding System.map file, the modules built by the + packager, and scripts that try to ensure that the system is not left in an + unbootable state after an update. + . + Supports SUPPORTED processors. + . + TARGET + . + You likely do not want to install this package directly. Instead, install + the linux-FLAVOUR meta-package, which will ensure that upgrades work + correctly, and that supporting packages are also installed. + Package: linux-headers-PKGVER-ABINUM-FLAVOUR Architecture: ARCH Section: devel diff --git a/debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk b/debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk index 13602c4..8915c40 100644 --- a/debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk +++ b/debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk @@ -130,6 +130,7 @@ stampdir := $(CURDIR)/debian/stamps # assumption that the binary package always starts with linux-image will never change. # bin_pkg_name=linux-image-$(abi_release) +extra_pkg_name=linux-image-extra-$(abi_release) hdrs_pkg_name=linux-headers-$(abi_release) # # The generation of content in the doc package depends on both 'AUTOBUILD=' and diff --git a/debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk b/debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk index c0259e6..7a42734 100644 --- a/debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk +++ b/debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk @@ -37,6 +37,7 @@ $(stampdir)/stamp-build-%: $(stampdir)/stamp-prepare-% # Install the finished build install-%: pkgdir = $(CURDIR)/debian/$(bin_pkg_name)-$* +install-%: pkgdir_ex = $(CURDIR)/debian/$(extra_pkg_name)-$* install-%: bindoc = $(pkgdir)/usr/share/doc/$(bin_pkg_name)-$* install-%: dbgpkgdir = $(CURDIR)/debian/$(bin_pkg_name)-$*-dbgsym install-%: basepkg = $(hdrs_pkg_name) @@ -82,17 +83,16 @@ endif # Remove all modules not in the inclusion list. # if [ -f $(DEBIAN)/control.d/$(target_flavour).inclusion-list ] ; then \ - mkdir -p $(pkgdir)-ALL/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*; \ + mkdir -p $(pkgdir_ex)/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*; \ mv $(pkgdir)/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel \ - $(pkgdir)-ALL/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel; \ + $(pkgdir_ex)/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel; \ $(SHELL) $(DROOT)/scripts/module-inclusion --master \ - $(pkgdir)-ALL/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel \ + $(pkgdir_ex)/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel \ $(pkgdir)/lib/modules/$(abi_release)-$*/kernel \ $(DEBIAN)/control.d/$(target_flavour).inclusion-list 2>&1 | \ tee $(target_flavour).inclusion-list.log; \ /sbin/depmod -b $(pkgdir) -ea -F $(pkgdir)/boot/System.map-$(abi_release)-$* \ $(abi_release)-$* 2>&1 |tee $(target_flavour).depmod.log; \ - rm -rf $(pkgdir)-ALL; \ fi ifeq ($(no_dumpfile),) @@ -274,9 +274,11 @@ endif endif binary-%: pkgimg = $(bin_pkg_name)-$* +binary-%: pkgimg_ex = $(extra_pkg_name)-$* binary-%: pkghdr = $(hdrs_pkg_name)-$* binary-%: dbgpkg = $(bin_pkg_name)-$*-dbgsym binary-%: dbgpkgdir = $(CURDIR)/debian/$(bin_pkg_name)-$*-dbgsym +binary-%: target_flavour = $* binary-%: install-% dh_testdir dh_testroot @@ -291,6 +293,18 @@ binary-%: install-% dh_md5sums -p$(pkgimg) dh_builddeb -p$(pkgimg) -- -Zbzip2 -z9 + if [ -f $(DEBIAN)/control.d/$(target_flavour).inclusion-list ] ; then \ + dh_installchangelogs -p$(pkgimg_ex); \ + dh_installdocs -p$(pkgimg_ex); \ + dh_compress -p$(pkgimg_ex); \ + dh_fixperms -p$(pkgimg_ex) -X/boot/; \ + dh_installdeb -p$(pkgimg_ex); \ + dh_shlibdeps -p$(pkgimg_ex); \ + dh_gencontrol -p$(pkgimg_ex); \ + dh_md5sums -p$(pkgimg_ex); \ + dh_builddeb -p$(pkgimg_ex) -- -Zbzip2 -z9; \ + fi + dh_installchangelogs -p$(pkghdr) dh_installdocs -p$(pkghdr) dh_compress -p$(pkghdr) -- 1.7.4.1 -- kernel-team mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team |
Re: [PATCH 0/2] linux-image-extra support
|
In reply to this post by Andy Whitcroft-3
On 09/16/2011 07:45 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> During UDS we discussed the current slim version of the -virtual kernel > and how for some uses we desire a very slim kernel and for others we > desire a near complete install. We also noted that we have a constant > drip, drip, drop of new requests for packages to be added back into the > -virtual kernel. These are both time consuming, risky, and costly to SRU. > The suggested solution at UDS was to drop all of the remaining modules > excluded from the current linux-image-virtual into a new package which > could then be installed when missing packages were needed. > > Following this email are two patches. The first refactors the > module-inclusion logic so that it may be applied repeatedly and that > any left overs are retained. The second uses these new features to then > package up the remainder as linux-image-extras-virtual. > > This will both ameliorate the issues described above and would also provide > a solution for another work item related to improving the include exclude > list which was slated to simplify adding packages requested via the drips. > > In my testing the only difference between the previous linux-image-virtual > and the new is that the empty directories are elided. I do not expect > this to be an issue but would be easy to correct if needed. > > Proposing for Oneiric. > > -apw > > Andy Whitcroft (2): > UBUNTU: make module-inclusion selection retain the left overs > UBUNTU: add a new linux-image-extras package for virtual > > debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub | 21 ++++++++++++++ > debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk | 1 + > debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk | 22 ++++++++++++++- > debian/scripts/module-inclusion | 37 ++++++++++++++++---------- > 4 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > My understanding of the use case for the -virtual flavour is that it is supposed to be small and quick to load. Only persistent instances would require the modules in your proposed extras package. In that case why wouldn't the user install the -server flavour to begin with ? rtg -- Tim Gardner [hidden email] -- kernel-team mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team |
Re: [PATCH 0/2] linux-image-extra support
|
|
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 08:01:45AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
> On 09/16/2011 07:45 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > >During UDS we discussed the current slim version of the -virtual kernel > >and how for some uses we desire a very slim kernel and for others we > >desire a near complete install. We also noted that we have a constant > >drip, drip, drop of new requests for packages to be added back into the > >-virtual kernel. These are both time consuming, risky, and costly to SRU. > >The suggested solution at UDS was to drop all of the remaining modules > >excluded from the current linux-image-virtual into a new package which > >could then be installed when missing packages were needed. > > > >Following this email are two patches. The first refactors the > >module-inclusion logic so that it may be applied repeatedly and that > >any left overs are retained. The second uses these new features to then > >package up the remainder as linux-image-extras-virtual. > > > >This will both ameliorate the issues described above and would also provide > >a solution for another work item related to improving the include exclude > >list which was slated to simplify adding packages requested via the drips. > > > >In my testing the only difference between the previous linux-image-virtual > >and the new is that the empty directories are elided. I do not expect > >this to be an issue but would be easy to correct if needed. > > > >Proposing for Oneiric. > > > >-apw > > > >Andy Whitcroft (2): > > UBUNTU: make module-inclusion selection retain the left overs > > UBUNTU: add a new linux-image-extras package for virtual > > > > debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub | 21 ++++++++++++++ > > debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk | 1 + > > debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk | 22 ++++++++++++++- > > debian/scripts/module-inclusion | 37 ++++++++++++++++---------- > > 4 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > > > My understanding of the use case for the -virtual flavour is that it > is supposed to be small and quick to load. Only persistent instances > would require the modules in your proposed extras package. In that > case why wouldn't the user install the -server flavour to begin with The perception is that the -virtual instance is better suited to and configured appropriatly for a virtual setting. For example -virtual has cirtain boot essential xen drivers built in which the -server does not. It is also generally configured in a more light-weight form, fewer CPU and the like. So people tend to want the -virtual but with "just a few more modules". -apw -- kernel-team mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team |
Re: [PATCH 0/2] linux-image-extra support
|
|
On 09/16/2011 08:11 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 08:01:45AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote: >> On 09/16/2011 07:45 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote: >>> During UDS we discussed the current slim version of the -virtual kernel >>> and how for some uses we desire a very slim kernel and for others we >>> desire a near complete install. We also noted that we have a constant >>> drip, drip, drop of new requests for packages to be added back into the >>> -virtual kernel. These are both time consuming, risky, and costly to SRU. >>> The suggested solution at UDS was to drop all of the remaining modules >>> excluded from the current linux-image-virtual into a new package which >>> could then be installed when missing packages were needed. >>> >>> Following this email are two patches. The first refactors the >>> module-inclusion logic so that it may be applied repeatedly and that >>> any left overs are retained. The second uses these new features to then >>> package up the remainder as linux-image-extras-virtual. >>> >>> This will both ameliorate the issues described above and would also provide >>> a solution for another work item related to improving the include exclude >>> list which was slated to simplify adding packages requested via the drips. >>> >>> In my testing the only difference between the previous linux-image-virtual >>> and the new is that the empty directories are elided. I do not expect >>> this to be an issue but would be easy to correct if needed. >>> >>> Proposing for Oneiric. >>> >>> -apw >>> >>> Andy Whitcroft (2): >>> UBUNTU: make module-inclusion selection retain the left overs >>> UBUNTU: add a new linux-image-extras package for virtual >>> >>> debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub | 21 ++++++++++++++ >>> debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk | 1 + >>> debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk | 22 ++++++++++++++- >>> debian/scripts/module-inclusion | 37 ++++++++++++++++---------- >>> 4 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) >>> >> >> My understanding of the use case for the -virtual flavour is that it >> is supposed to be small and quick to load. Only persistent instances >> would require the modules in your proposed extras package. In that >> case why wouldn't the user install the -server flavour to begin with > > The perception is that the -virtual instance is better suited to and > configured appropriatly for a virtual setting. For example -virtual has > cirtain boot essential xen drivers built in which the -server does not. > It is also generally configured in a more light-weight form, fewer CPU > and the like. So people tend to want the -virtual but with "just a few > more modules". > > -apw Hmm, I'd forgotten about the Xen drivers. Well, if we're gonna go the route of having an extras package, then why don't we make -virtual _really_ lean and fast and move all but the boot essential bits into the extras package ? Perhaps thats something we can explore for 12.04. At any rate, Acked-by: Tim Gardner <[hidden email]> -- Tim Gardner [hidden email] -- kernel-team mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team |
Re: [PATCH 0/2] linux-image-extra support
|
|
On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 08:25:52AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote:
> On 09/16/2011 08:11 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > >On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 08:01:45AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote: > >>On 09/16/2011 07:45 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > >>>During UDS we discussed the current slim version of the -virtual kernel > >>>and how for some uses we desire a very slim kernel and for others we > >>>desire a near complete install. We also noted that we have a constant > >>>drip, drip, drop of new requests for packages to be added back into the > >>>-virtual kernel. These are both time consuming, risky, and costly to SRU. > >>>The suggested solution at UDS was to drop all of the remaining modules > >>>excluded from the current linux-image-virtual into a new package which > >>>could then be installed when missing packages were needed. > >>> > >>>Following this email are two patches. The first refactors the > >>>module-inclusion logic so that it may be applied repeatedly and that > >>>any left overs are retained. The second uses these new features to then > >>>package up the remainder as linux-image-extras-virtual. > >>> > >>>This will both ameliorate the issues described above and would also provide > >>>a solution for another work item related to improving the include exclude > >>>list which was slated to simplify adding packages requested via the drips. > >>> > >>>In my testing the only difference between the previous linux-image-virtual > >>>and the new is that the empty directories are elided. I do not expect > >>>this to be an issue but would be easy to correct if needed. > >>> > >>>Proposing for Oneiric. > >>> > >>>-apw > >>> > >>>Andy Whitcroft (2): > >>> UBUNTU: make module-inclusion selection retain the left overs > >>> UBUNTU: add a new linux-image-extras package for virtual > >>> > >>> debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub | 21 ++++++++++++++ > >>> debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk | 1 + > >>> debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk | 22 ++++++++++++++- > >>> debian/scripts/module-inclusion | 37 ++++++++++++++++---------- > >>> 4 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > >>> > >> > >>My understanding of the use case for the -virtual flavour is that it > >>is supposed to be small and quick to load. Only persistent instances > >>would require the modules in your proposed extras package. In that > >>case why wouldn't the user install the -server flavour to begin with > > > >The perception is that the -virtual instance is better suited to and > >configured appropriatly for a virtual setting. For example -virtual has > >cirtain boot essential xen drivers built in which the -server does not. > >It is also generally configured in a more light-weight form, fewer CPU > >and the like. So people tend to want the -virtual but with "just a few > >more modules". > > > >-apw > > Hmm, I'd forgotten about the Xen drivers. Well, if we're gonna go > the route of having an extras package, then why don't we make > -virtual _really_ lean and fast and move all but the boot essential > bits into the extras package ? Perhaps thats something we can > explore for 12.04. At any rate, > > Acked-by: Tim Gardner <[hidden email]> Yeah I'd be up for a bit of that. -apw -- kernel-team mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team |
[APPLIED] [PATCH 0/2] linux-image-extra support
|
On Fri, 2011-09-16 at 15:47 +0100, Andy Whitcroft wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 08:25:52AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote: > > On 09/16/2011 08:11 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > > >On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 08:01:45AM -0600, Tim Gardner wrote: > > >>On 09/16/2011 07:45 AM, Andy Whitcroft wrote: > > >>>During UDS we discussed the current slim version of the -virtual kernel > > >>>and how for some uses we desire a very slim kernel and for others we > > >>>desire a near complete install. We also noted that we have a constant > > >>>drip, drip, drop of new requests for packages to be added back into the > > >>>-virtual kernel. These are both time consuming, risky, and costly to SRU. > > >>>The suggested solution at UDS was to drop all of the remaining modules > > >>>excluded from the current linux-image-virtual into a new package which > > >>>could then be installed when missing packages were needed. > > >>> > > >>>Following this email are two patches. The first refactors the > > >>>module-inclusion logic so that it may be applied repeatedly and that > > >>>any left overs are retained. The second uses these new features to then > > >>>package up the remainder as linux-image-extras-virtual. > > >>> > > >>>This will both ameliorate the issues described above and would also provide > > >>>a solution for another work item related to improving the include exclude > > >>>list which was slated to simplify adding packages requested via the drips. > > >>> > > >>>In my testing the only difference between the previous linux-image-virtual > > >>>and the new is that the empty directories are elided. I do not expect > > >>>this to be an issue but would be easy to correct if needed. > > >>> > > >>>Proposing for Oneiric. > > >>> > > >>>-apw > > >>> > > >>>Andy Whitcroft (2): > > >>> UBUNTU: make module-inclusion selection retain the left overs > > >>> UBUNTU: add a new linux-image-extras package for virtual > > >>> > > >>> debian.master/control.d/flavour-control.stub | 21 ++++++++++++++ > > >>> debian/rules.d/0-common-vars.mk | 1 + > > >>> debian/rules.d/2-binary-arch.mk | 22 ++++++++++++++- > > >>> debian/scripts/module-inclusion | 37 ++++++++++++++++---------- > > >>> 4 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-) > > >>> > > >> > > >>My understanding of the use case for the -virtual flavour is that it > > >>is supposed to be small and quick to load. Only persistent instances > > >>would require the modules in your proposed extras package. In that > > >>case why wouldn't the user install the -server flavour to begin with > > > > > >The perception is that the -virtual instance is better suited to and > > >configured appropriatly for a virtual setting. For example -virtual has > > >cirtain boot essential xen drivers built in which the -server does not. > > >It is also generally configured in a more light-weight form, fewer CPU > > >and the like. So people tend to want the -virtual but with "just a few > > >more modules". > > > > > >-apw > > > > Hmm, I'd forgotten about the Xen drivers. Well, if we're gonna go > > the route of having an extras package, then why don't we make > > -virtual _really_ lean and fast and move all but the boot essential > > bits into the extras package ? Perhaps thats something we can > > explore for 12.04. At any rate, > > > > Acked-by: Tim Gardner <[hidden email]> > > Yeah I'd be up for a bit of that. Signed-off-by: Leann Ogasawara <[hidden email]> Applied to Oneiric master-next. Will also jot down an agenda item in the version and flavors specs for UDS-P. Thanks, Leann -- kernel-team mailing list [hidden email] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/kernel-team |
«
Return to kernel-team
|
1 view|%1 views
Loading...
| Powered by Nabble | Edit this page |