[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [klibc] klibc and what's the next step?
Linus Torvalds wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2006, Olaf Hering wrote:
>>> It's a proposal, and I personally think it makes sense. If done, it is
>>> obviously very important that it doesn't change the overall operation of
>>> the system.
>> I think you can have that today, parted uses BLKPG to add and remoe
>> things. No idea what the benefit would be, but thats not relavant for
>> kinit or no kinit.
> The notion that the kernel itself should do no partition parsing at all
> was advocated by Andries Brouwer. I violently disagree. Anything that the
> lack of which makes a normal system basically unusable should go into the
> kernel.

Does that mean "in kernel space", "in the kernel distribution" or "in
memory completely under the control by the kernel?" That is really what
this is about.

There could be a klibc-build binary in rootfs, build at the time the
kernel was built, that can be invoked by the kernel in parallel with

> Yes, the kernel rules are heuristics, but so would inevitably any
> user-level rules be too, so I don't want to move partition detection to
> initrd or similar.

The whole point of putting klibc in the kernel tree is so we can do this
kind of stuff without breaking the stock kernel build as a
self-contained entity. Without that objective, Olaf is right that it is
not necessary.

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2006-07-11 21:41    [W:0.142 / U:1.584 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site