I don't understand the desire to change it at all.
We know where the kern modules are now, we've known for over a decade,
just leave it as it was.
If systemd wasn't, this wouldn't be talked about.
Which is why it shouldn't be discussed.
Don't let them pull you by the nose.
At all.
On 2016-01-04 16:43, Didier Kryn wrote:
> Le 04/01/2016 17:32, Svante Signell a écrit :
>> On Mon, 2016-01-04 at 16:53 +0100, Didier Kryn wrote:
>>> Le 04/01/2016 16:26, Hendrik Boom a écrit :
>>>> I meant
>>>>>> 4) Let the installer build the kernel, depending on what the
>>>>>> hardware
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> file systems being installed actually need.
>>> Maybe Gentoo does this, although I'm not sure, but the
>>> philosophy
>>> is very different: they compile everything from source. And it
>>> doesn't
>>> install as smoothly as Devuan.
>>>
>>> In Devuan it means something very unusual: the installer must
>>> first
>>> install gcc, generate a config file and compile the kernel. It is not
>>> an
>>> easy task to generate a working config for any hardware combination.
>>> The
>>> resulting kernel package would be local and couldn't undergo
>>> upgrades.
>> Just an idea: Would it be possible to detect the hardware of each
>> computer being
>> installed on and after that install the needed modules? Preferably the
>> modules
>> should not be located on /usr, currently they are under /lib.
>>
> I don't understand the repulsion towards having the modules in
> /usr/lib. What difference does it make? None, unless you want the
> three following conditions: no initramfs, /usr being a mountpoint,
> some drivers and filesystems compiled in the kernel, but missing just
> the one for /usr. You've got to work pretty hard to fulfill these
> conditions.
>
> Didier
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dng mailing list
> Dng@???
> https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng