lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [May]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: dropping kerneld...
Lauri Tischler:
> Matthias Urlichs:
> > "Lauri Tischler:
> > > Yup, I'm missing a lot of pain and useless complications by not
> > > using kerneld and modules. Quite useless contraptions both.
> > Before modules and initrd, I've had to build a kernel for each of these
> > beasts. Ugh. Now, I build the kerneld 100% modularized (OK, OK, binfmt_elf

> Yech.. sounds nutty and dangerous.
> Why dont you just load appropiate modules directly without kerneld ?
>
> I have said before that kerneld _might_ have a place somewhere where
> underpowered hardware is the _only_ choise. (compare travelling 3000
> km's with bicycle instead by airplane).
>
> Saving 100-300 kilobytes of memory is truly not worth the hassle in
> any 'normal' systems.

> Lauri Tischler, Network Admin Tel: +358-0-47846331

In my opinion kerneld is the best thing since sliced bread (at least whitin
the linux context). I can't imagine that anyone seriously can think that to
load modules manually or compile everything into the kernel is final answer
here. It's true that not everything works as smoothly as one might wish
with kerneld yet, but remember that it's a relativly new addition to linux
and that it takes a certain amount of time to fix all the problems with any
new solutions.

Myself I use it and will certainly continue to use it.

kind regards,
kjell m.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.035 / U:0.196 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site