Re: The Kernel

[Erik Walthinsen <omega@omegacs.net>]

> > On Mon, 19 Jan 1998, Roger R Dingledine wrote:
Just for the record, Roger didn't write what was quoted.

> He's talking about the *SEUL* kernel not the *Linux core* kernel.  He's
> talking about doing what every other dist does.  He's also saying that
> SEUL should be more careful in putting out a top quality kernel as
> opposed to some dists that might just throw it in without testing beyond
> insuring it boots.  So what's the problem, as long as *Linux core*
> remains standard?

Right.  Here's how it works:

The Core defines what a given version will provide, at minimum, to the
upstream objects, i.e. the SEUL components and apps.

A reference implementation of the Core will include a basic kernel that 
meets these requirements, and looks like a good starting place for most 
distribs.  The RedHat kernels looks like a good candidate for this, though 
I'm not commenting on the presence of patches here.

An actual kernel used in a distribution, such as SEUL, may be *any* kernel 
that provides the minimum functionality as defined by the Core spec.


That means that the reference implementation's kernel may be quite a bit
different from the SEUL kernel, but it can only be *so* different before it 
wanders out of spec.

If I can ever find some time to write this stuff down, this will be one of 
the points I cover heavily.

     Erik Walthinsen <omega@seul.org> - SEUL Project system architect
        __
       /  \                SEUL: Simple End-User Linux -
      |    | M E G A            Creating a Linux distribution
      _\  /_                         for the home or office user