[lkml]   [1999]   [Jun]   [19]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Why khttpd is a bad idea (was a pointless argument about
On Sat, Jun 19, 1999 at 07:25:02PM +0200, Marek Habersack wrote:
> * Matthew Wilcox said:
> > On Fri, Jun 18, 1999 at 07:13:40PM -0700, Dan Hollis wrote:
> > > khttpd is also attractive for embedded systems 8)
> >
> > uhh.. why do you want an embedded system to serve static webpages?
> > dynamic webpages, I can understand, so it can report its status.
> If you have ever seen 3Com's NetBuilder SuperStack II, or the 3Com's
> Switches WEB-based management interface, then you would certainly see a
> reason for static webpages in an embedded environment.

And you assert this could not be done in user space at sufficient speed?

Matthew Wilcox <>
"Windows and MacOS are products, contrived by engineers in the service of
specific companies. Unix, by contrast, is not so much a product as it is a
painstakingly compiled oral history of the hacker subculture." - N Stephenson

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

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:52    [W:0.044 / U:3.104 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site