Re: Do I need the kernel-source?

If you haven't compiled a kernel before, I wouldn't recommend trying to
compile a sparc kernel without modules.  If the kernel is not small enough,
silo won't boot it.  The easiest way to make it small is to use modules.

I also think the "no modules" issue is over rated.  Stay up to date with
security fixes, and use a strong firewall.  Only after you've gotten all the
important issues handled should you worry about rogue kernel modules.

-Patrick

"Rodolfo J. Paiz" <[email protected]> wrote:
> At 5/14/2002 10:42 AM -0500, Ben Ricker wrote:
> >One point to add: to keep the box as secure as possible, and since it is
> >a firewall, I would suggest removing kernel-headers and NOT using kernel
> >modules (i.e., compiling a static kernel.
> 
> Hey, I'm all for paranoia. After all, on the Internet, they *are* out to 
> get you and there is no such thing as too paranoid.
> 
> I shudder to do my first kernel compile on a "mission-critical" box; still,
> I suppose I can always reboot into a known-good kernel, and silo 
> autodetects kernels saving me that one other possible source of grief.
> 
> Is there anything I *should* definitely include in my kernel? Also, I guess
> that for maximum probability of successful operation, I should compile the 
> same version of the kernel (i.e. the one for which I already have sources 
> and headers and docs)?
> 
> Sorry to start at such a basic stage...
> 
> 
> -- 
> Rodolfo J. Paiz
> [email protected]
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sparc-list mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/sparc-list

Patrick Hill
[email protected]