3 ms·
> Why do I need to rebuild without Bluetooth support? I think the point here is that any code on your system is a potential security liability, regardless of w
by steeleduncan 4y ago
> Why do I need to rebuild without Bluetooth support?
I think the point here is that any code on your system is a potential security liability, regardless of whether the relevant feature is active. Removing linked in code removes potential security liabilities and as such it is always a good thing.
Regarding the original article's question Can you tell my how many steps . . . Ubuntu for example without Bluetooth support?, its not actually that bad
apt-get source linux-image-$(uname -r)
edit your options and get compiling.
- mekster 4y ago> I think the point here is that any code on your system is a potential security liability, regardless of whether the relevant feature is active. zzz... Then I guess any binary distro that you don't compile your own kernel with absolute minimum requirement aren't good? Not sure how Red Hat customers are doing their business then.
- BirAdam 4y agoSomething working out well up to the present moment does not mean that it is the best possible solution. Most stuff is garbage and could be improved. If you want the most secure system, you minimize the amount of stuff that’s in it and you increase the quality of that stuff that is there.
- mekster 4y agoTalk is easy. People weigh practicality over theoretical perfection.
- corrral 4y ago> Regarding the original article's question Can you tell my how many steps . . . Ubuntu for example without Bluetooth support?, its not actually that bad Finally. I'm surprised at how many posters here deflected this point, because last I checked it's actually really easy on major distros. I guess that tells us something about how many Linux users on HN have ever compiled their kernel, that most were like "LOL why?" and not "sure, it's easy".