lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Oct]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
Why is modprobe kept as a separate executable, when nothing else in the
kernel is (seems to be)? What is the advantage to keeping modprobe separate,
instead of statically linked into the kernel? Are users able to replace
modprobe with a better version? If so, why not do the same thing with other
occasionally-used code which could be replaced? Something like Rik's OOM
killer comes to mind, except that obviously if you're out of memory you're
not going to be able to load a new executable.

chris

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 12:41    [W:0.063 / U:2.240 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site