> > X different drivers means X times acceleration functions in the
> > kernel or am I missing something here? (no it doesn't matter that one
> > should only compile what one uses, its still in the kernel tree).
>
> I'm not sure I see a way around having sources in the kernel tree.
> Either you support a piece of graphics hardware, or you don't. If
> linux wants to support graphics hardware, the drivers have to be in the
> kernel tree. Is that a bad thing?
>
> If it is, then adding hardware support to the kernel is ALWAYS a bad
> thing. I know of very few pieces of hardware that EVERYONE wants to
> use. Your logic seems to be that drivers that not everyone needs are
> source bloat.
No, I don't think that is his exact opinion. I think his logic
is more: 'that drivers that HE doesn't use are source bloat'.
Mike A. Harris | Homepage: http://blackwidow.saultc.on.ca/~mharris
Computer Consultant |
I collect and browse commercial email sent to: root@127.0.0.1
URL: Sun Microsystems http://www.sun.com
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu