linux-kernel - Re: [RFC] Simplifying kernel configuration for distro issues

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAG-2HqVOJ=+YxaVOy2NSXt76zW8edJ0uP7NcObHhESwSwFHcqw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:55:02 +0200
From:	Tom Gundersen <teg@...m.no>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] Simplifying kernel configuration for distro issues

Linus,

[sorry for the messed up threading, I could not figure out how to make
gmail use in-relp-to]

> The point I'm slowly getting to is that I would actually love to have
> *distro* Kconfig-files, where the distribution would be able to say
> "These are the minimums I *require* to work". So we'd have a "Distro"
> submenu, where you could pick the distro(s) you use, and then pick
> which release, and we'd have something like

As someone working on one of the smaller distributions (Arch), I think
it would be even better if rather than having "distro" entries, we'd
have "application" entries. I.e., entries for applications that have
specific kernel requirements/suggestions (udev, systemd, upstart,
bootchart, pulseaudio, networkmanager, etc). If applications have soft
requirements, they could have sub-entries explaining the benefit of
enabling each.

In most cases, what a distro needs depends just on what applications
they ship, so you'd get the distro entries almost for free (fedora
selects systemd, udev, ...).

As was pointed out by someone else in this thread, it might easily
happen that applications change their kernel requirements without the
packagers noticing, or at least without the kernel packager being
told. If it had been possible for applications to ship drop-in Kconfig
files that they would install to a certain location, and the kernel
would simply pick them up, that would put the responsibility of
maintaining these things in the hands of the people who know the best
(the application developers).

Cheers,

Tom
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/