Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 23 Dec 1999 14:57:53 +0100 | From | Marek Habersack <> | Subject | Re: Bloat? (khttpd) |
| |
* Dwayne C . Litzenberger said:
> > Performance. The apache/khttpd combo beats the shit out of NT in most > > benchmarks. > > Maybe so, but why don't we put Quake into the kernel, too? You would get > great performance, but something like that simply belongs in user space. I > don't think Linux deserves the benchmarks it gets if it cheats to get > them. We shouldn't let politics allow us to employ bad design (If a > registry ala Windows was a performance issue, would we use it? No, > because it makes a mess of everything). > > An HTTP server is something that should be in a patch, not the main kernel > tree. (Heck, software suspend and the PC-speaker driver should go in > before khttpd does.) Come on, I don't understand the noise. You don't like it, you don't use it. After all compiling it in is OPTIONAL, right?
marek [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature] | |