Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 07 Jun 1999 23:50:11 -0700 | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | Subject | Re: Preparations for ZD's upcoming Apache/Linux benchmark |
| |
> > There are definitely gains to having static serving and similar things > in kernel space... but this sort of thing should really be a > separately-distributed kernel module. khttpd could definitely be useful > on 2.0, 2.2, and 2.3 kernels. And the development pace and stability > of khttpd and the kernel might not necessarily intersect often. > > Tangent to this, it would be cool to move some drivers to a "driver pack", > basically a separate release tarball that closely tracks kernel releases. > > It seems to me that you get better results sometimes by mixing and > matching specific driver versions direct from its maintainer, as opposed > to mixing and matching kernel releases themselves to get a good, stable > combination. Plus, stable, well-tested versions of some drivers sometimes > appear faster than the stable versions of the kernel itself. >
This is true. Something I'd like to get fixed in 2.3 is the pains that one have to go through to compile a kernel module out-of-kernel. Some of it can be dealt with autoconf macros, but that's not ideal.
-hpa
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |