Re: Why not make Linux source modular?
Dan Miner (email@example.com)
Tue, 27 Feb 1996 12:47:24 -0700 (MST)
According to Linus Torvalds:
> > On Wed, 21 Feb 1996 firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
> > > My point is this: Why is Linux kernel source distributed as one big lump?
> > >
> > > Many of the drivers could be distributed seperatly as modules, such as file
> > > system drivers, some Networking protocols, Net cards etc... and have different
> > > people maintaining them. Ftape already does this, and it works. (Although
> > > he is mumbling about integrating it with the kernel...)
> One _major_ advantage as having it all in one lump is that when I change
> some interface, I can then fix all the pieces that use that interface,
> rather than just tell people who maintain all the pieces to fix it.
> Believe me, it makes things a _lot_ easier.
Your point is understandable. However, a lot of the kernel code isn't used
in a simple installation. Look at the Ethernet card drivers, how many
of us have 5 different cards in a machine? Its the driver code have seems
to be expanding by leaps. Perhaps just having "drop-in" source modules for
netdrivers and SCSI drivers. These take 4.5 megs combined.
The idea isn't to make it hard for developers, but the size of the kernel
is a consideration that should be addressed. I've not seen much of
this thread but I agree something needs to be done fairly soon. The
question is: how?
Dan Miner email@example.com
"The longer I stare at this screen; the blanker it gets."
Linux: try it, you'll like.
"Your program is encoded in pi." I started with a 64