[lkml]   [1997]   [Jan]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: modutils, the next generation
.m is a programming file type used in more than once language already, but
km is a good one i think

> From: Derrik Pates <dpates@Cavern.NMSU.Edu>
> To: Martin Buck <>
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: modutils, the next generation
> Date: Monday, January 13, 1997 1:16 PM
> On Mon, 13 Jan 1997, Martin Buck wrote:
> > Sorry, no answer to your question, but I've got another question
> > modules and their recognition:
> > Why do modules use .o as extension? Of course, they're object files,
> > very special ones, so an extension like .mod would make much more
> > IMHO. If I remeber correctly, the old insmod/depmod/modprobe (never
> > at TNG) even checked for .mod in some places, but it didn't work
> > the check for .mod was missing at some other places.
> I'd say .mod is not a good extension to use - it's already used by a
> file format. But, if we want to give loadable modules their own
> how about .m or .k or maybe .km ?? Just food for thought.
> Derrik Pates
> "What'll you two lovable plush toys have?"
> "How 'bout a root beer popsicle and an Orange Julius? What about you,
> Max?"
> "Dishwater! And put it in a dirty glass!"
> -Sam & Max
> "Fair Wind to Java"

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.039 / U:2.836 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site