standard dCore-kernel alternatives

[netnomad]

hi jason,

do you think that there is a way to provide some alternative kernels for dCore?
i'm thinking about the choice of offering the kernel according to the debian-distribution,
that means to offer the typical jessie version and f.e. for stretch the actual debian testing kernel.
another aspect for offering some different, but standardized kernels is the opportunity to share experiences, too.

in the moment i'm happy that the actual tinycore-3.16.6-kernel offers me suspend to ram,
but the kernel causes in fluxbox with xorg some grafic-bugs
(some slit-applets and various icons are displayed with errors).

i know that the main idea is to offer the same base as tinycore and microcore,
but on the other side dcore offers far more flexibility with its package-system,
so perhaps you see there a chance for enhancements.

thank you for your patience and interest.

[Jason W]

Since dCore is more Tinycore than Debian in what it needs kernel wise, I don't see a reason to use our own builds of the Debian kernel versions.  And that would mean more builds, bugs, testing, etc that I honestly don't have time for.  Any kernel build is going to have some bugs somewhere, we just have to live with what bugs are there, the bugs will just be different in another release.

We would have to build the Debian kernel version with our own config needs, the only difference in that is the kernel version numbers.   But I would like to leave each dCore with a kernel version in the same era as the Debian release was as packages that have a kernel module build as part of their compiling like Virtualbox may not build against a much newer kernel version, I have seen that once.

[Jason W]

ubuntu Vivid in both it's standard and dCore form mess up the titlebar of Icewm at times on my box, just an observation.  Changes fix some things, and also break others.