Why no /proc/config.gz on FC-3 kernel?
Dag Wieers
dag at wieers.com
Mon Nov 29 02:25:17 UTC 2004
On Sun, 28 Nov 2004, Dave Jones wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 01:07:58AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
>
> > > ls /boot/config-`uname -r`
> >
> > I guess the argument is: there's a chance that something got skipped and the
> > a kernel got built with the name matching a /boot/config-* file but actually
> > with different options -- no risk of that with the /proc approach.
>
> There's no risk of it happening with the current approach either.
> The .config that gets packaged is the .config rpmbuild faced
> when it built the RPM. Why would it be different ?
Well, I can imagine the situation that Fedora has already upgraded your
kernel (read: replaced) and some clever mechanisme needs the kernel config
to dynamically build a module for your current kernel. (DKMS?)
Or when you have made your own kernel, and the config is not installed in
/boot. Of course a tool can check that, can check the rpmdb and a lot of
other things, but it would not have the same simplicity as a
/proc/config.gz that is guaranteed to be there. (A lot of people rebuild
kernels from the original Red Hat config file BTW)
Again, I'm not in favor of one or another, but I can see some potential
for having it around. One can disagree with that, but can't ignore that it
gives more guarantees or potential.
-- dag wieers, dag at wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ --
[Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list