> We aren't talking about a module when it's compiled into the kernel. In
> the case(s) of modules, there are many ways to provide data (such as
> firmware) without the aforementioned bloat everyone wants to bitch about.
Like loading it from user space. Which is exactly the same code needed
for an initrd. Amazing isn it.
> And I'd like to point out the people screaming about bloat do not have
> the hardware for which this driver is required and thusly will *never*
Wrong. I object to wasting 128K and I have fibrechannel. Its that kind of
sloppy "who cares about 128K" thinking that leads to several megs
disappearing and your OS turning into sludge.
> So basically, you had no fucking clue what kind of instability you were about
> to introduce into the current "stable" line of kernels, but did it anyway
It caused a trivial little problem for a few sparc people which basically has
only been more than a
"Hey Alan, sparc needs firmware compiled in can you fix"
because it seems you have to be arrogant and opinionated to own a sparc64
box 8)
> the file was entered into the tree. If there were objections, questions,
> or other concerns, they should have been raised then and not months or years
> later. And there should have been at least some discussion before removing
Take that one up with Linus. I didn't merge it originally
Alan
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Aug 23 2001 - 21:00:48 EST