Forking off the thread before... It's arrogant and hopelessly short sighted, to assume that one kernel will be enough. If we went that way, then that would provide *more* reason for DKMS anyway. As the amount of people compiling custom kernels would skyrocket, thus making DKMS even more useful. Arch has had more than one kernel for years. And there's no downside to having more than one, provided that they are sufficiently maintained. DKMS would make maintenance far far easier and tidier, while making the user's life a bit easier too. I'd be willing to pick up suspend2/tuxonice if we went to DKMS too. (didnt brain0 drop that, or am i making things up?) James