lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: khttpd fate
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 06:15:40PM -0700, Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> I was reviewing khttpd [1] history [2], and the last I see is it was
> merged for the 2.4 kernel with enthusiasm. I don't see any information
> about this for 2.6 though, nor can I find any other notes about why
> this was removed. Just curious if someone recalls why it was removed.
>
> Also, I really hate how trolly this questions sounds but here it goes anyway:
>
> Such userspace-kernel hacks shouldn't be necessary anymore based on
> 'performance/latency' arguments right? I take it khttpd wasn't serious
> but more of a hack for fun and now we should be able to laugh about
> it?
>
> [1] http://www.fenrus.demon.nl/
> [2] http://lwn.net/2001/0118/kernel.php3
>

I think it kind of got replaced by tux, which Red Hat shipped for a
while, but has been dropped now. I seem to recall davej mentioning a
while ago that apache had gotten much better at serving static content,
which is what khttpd/tux were very good at.

regards, Kyle


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-07-22 02:23    [W:0.058 / U:11.356 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site