On Tue, Sep 27, 2005 at 08:52:26AM -0700, Christoph Lameter wrote: > On Mon, 26 Sep 2005, dann frazier wrote: > > > The biggest headache with maintaining the ia64 kernel has probably been > > with the non-SMP flavours. Generic/non-SMP configs seem to not get much > > attention upstream. This makes sense given that most ia64 machines are > > SMP capable. In fact, I don't think there's a non-SMP capable ia64 > > machine on the market these days. A number of them are out there, > > however, including the machine I'm using to compose this message... > > non-SMP kernels may be useful for a number of specialized uses. Think > about kexec, test situations, low memory situations and running a > kernel in a virtualized environment.
Should Debian be burdened with supplying kernels for these situations? Or should Debian provide kernels that perform acceptably well for 99% of their users? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
