[PATCH 0/2] linux-image-extra support

Tim Gardner tim.gardner at canonical.com
Fri Sep 16 14:01:45 UTC 2011

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 ?

Tim Gardner tim.gardner at canonical.com

More information about the kernel-team mailing list