On 03/02/16 13:32, Fabian Arrotin wrote: > On 03/02/16 14:24, Brian Stinson wrote: >> Hi All, > >> I'm working on putting some things together for a couple of the >> Intel boards (Edison, Jaguarboard, etc.) and was wondering if >> there's a standard way we should be naming things on the install >> media. > >> For the rpi2, we use 'CentOS Altarch 7 (1511) Userland for armhfp' > >> A lot of the Intel boards out there require a newer or otherwise >> non-distro kernel so I was considering titling the install media >> like this: > >> CentOS Altarch 7 (1511) Userland for x86_64 > >> Not sure if the 'Altarch' bit applies because it's the standard >> x86_64 userland (no rebuilding needed). > >> Cheers! --Brian > > Well, indeed pros and cons ... I'd use "Userland" to show indeed that > kernel isn't the one from CentOs 7 x86_64 (like we did for armhfp) but > I'd remove the AltArch tag. otoh, if that image would be produced > under the AltArch SIG umbrella, it's worth keeping it in the name. When we spoke about this - the intention of Userland was to communicate that we were going to work with or use a vendor supplied kernel ( eg. for rpi2 ) - so the experience and feature set was largely set by them, whereas CentOS provided the userland. If we are still going to curate that kernel - we might not need that. certainly something worth talking about when we know the specifics. Also, with all the newer kernel req's - it might be good to actually just adopt a 4.x kernel into centos-plus and go with that regards -- Karanbir Singh +44-207-0999389 | http://www.karan.org/ | twitter.com/kbsingh GnuPG Key : http://www.karan.org/publickey.asc