[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:0.019 / U:2.932 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site